Attitudes of selected groups toward media coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry on Police Corruption in Queensland.
by
Bernie Murchison B.Bus. (Comn)
Master of Business (Communication) Thesis
School of Communication
Queensland University of Technology
February 1989 To the Librarian, Queensland University of Technology
Name: Bernard John MURCHISON
Address:
Title of thesis: ATTITUDES OF SELECTED GROUPS TOWARDS MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY ON POLICE CORRUPTION IN QUEENSLAND.
A. I wish consultation of this thesis to be restricted only to staff and students of the Q.U.T. for three years after the degree has been awarded.
B. I give pennission to the Librarian of the Queensland University of Technology to photocopy this thesis on the condition that I am subsequently notified of the person or organisation to whom this copy has been supplied.
Signature: Date: ...... ~J.1.~i The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma at any other tertiary educational institution. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made.
Signed: Date: ...... 2:11 :#.f ... ABSTRACT
This study uses primary research in the form of Q Methodology to identify attitudes toward media coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry. Interviews were conducted with representatives of three distinct classes of people; senior journalists, opinion leaders and communication students. Opinion statements were extracted from these interviews and 44 Q statements were developed to measure attitudes of 47 respondents. Unlike many other forms of media research, no fixed definitions were prescribed and respondents subjective viewpoints, or ways of seeing an issue, were simply collated.
Three distinct types of people were identified. The largest was Type One and was named "The Fervent Crusader". The majority of the group consisted of journalists. A clear understanding that the media had a role as a public watchdog was present, supported by the view that only a tenacious grip could stop corruption from returning. Respondents held to an admonishment of any suggestion that they personally would hold any interest in voyeuristic or sensational aspects.
Opinion leaders formed the majority of Type Two, "The Journophobic". As the name implies, respondents revealed a distaste for most aspects of journalistic practices. While accepting that the media was at least partially responsible for the Fitzgerald Inquiry, most attention is applied to a strong skepticism.
It seems likely that this applied to journalistic practices in general, rather than reports on the Fitzgerald
Inquiry solely.
Type Three, "The Rational Observer", was more homogeneous. Unlike the other types, respondents of this type appeared to be more "objective" in assessing media coverage. They analysed the question of media reporting without the more myopic and sanguine saliency of the others.
( i) TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT •••••••••••••••••••••••• ...... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT •...... iv LIST OF QUANAL DATA ...... • . . . . • . . . . • . • . • . . . . • . v
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Purpose of study ...... 1 Theoretical relevance .•.•. , , • . • . • . • . • . . • • . • . • 2 A Matter of Opinion...... 4 Opinions and Attitudes ...... ,.,...... 5
2. STUDIES ON ATTITUDES TOWARD MASS MEDIA REPORTING.. 7
Consonance and Dissonance...... 7 Rationality and Rumour . . • • • • . . . . • • • • • • . • . . . . • 8 Empirical Research - News Selection...... 11 3. METHODOLOGY AND STUDY DESIGN ...... 25
Q Methodology ...... 27 Scope and Limitations ...••.•..••••.•...•..•••• 29 Statement Selection••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 32
4. INTERPRETATION OF STATISTICAL VALUES ...... 41 5. FACTOR 1 - "THE FERVENT CRUSADER"...... 50 Analysis...... 50 Items most significant to factor one ••...••.. 53 Discussion ...... 54
6. FACTOR II - "THE JOURNOPHOBIC" ...... 56 Analysis ...... 56 Items most significant to factor two...... 59 Discussion ...... 60
7. FACTOR III - "THE RATIONAL OBSERVER" 63
Analysis ...... 63 Items most significant to factor three .••••... 66 Discussion ...... 67
(ii} 8. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TYPES ...... 69
Type One and Type Two ••••.• 69 Type One and Type Three 74 Type Two and Type Three 77 The Consensus Factor 80
9. CONCLUSION ...... 81 Organisation and Justification 81 Rationale 82 Summary 83 Discussion 84 Conclusion 86
APPENDICES ...... 90 REFERENCES ...... 100
(iii) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Warmest thanks are extended to Dr F. N. (Chip) Karmatz for his constant support during the planning, research, writing and re-writing of this thesis. The knowledge and experience gained through his apprenticeship in
Q Methodology under its father, Dr Will Stephenson, has assured a more intimate, enjoyable and memorable way to learn and develop. It is pleasant to know that knowledge gained from textbooks and computers can be enhanced in the way of centuries past - from the master's apprentice to his/her apprentice.
I would like to thank Tony Stevenson for his considerable efforts to ensure a smooth transition for the first graduates of the Master of
Business - Communication program. In addition, my thanks go to all colleagues who provided a sympathetic ear and to Dr Bruce Molloy as Head of the School of Communication for his enthusiastic drive and assistance in helping staff attain higher degrees. Debbie Hunter deserves special mention for being so efficient and tireless, despite the headaches caused by transfering material from one word processing program to another.
Finally, my thanks to Dr Len Granato and Dr Sheldon Harsel who provided their time and considerable knowledge to assess and improve this work.
(iv) The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads * A Matter of Opinion •••
"Man does not deliberately falsify his environment, of course. But one observer's experience is never exactly like that of other observers, and he interprets his new experience in terms of his previous experience. Furthermore, a great part of his experience is already filtered before it comes to him •••• the comparatively meager time available in each day for paying attention to public affairs, the distortion arising because events have to be compressed into very short messages, the difficulty of making a small vocabulary express a complicated world, and finally the fear of facing those facts which would seem to threaten the established routine of men's lives."
* from Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion, New York: Harcourt, Brace 1922 Wilbur Schramm, The Process and Effects of Mass Communication, Chicago: University of Illinois Press 1970 pl09
(v) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
This study was designed to determine attitudes toward media coverage of a single news issue, using three separate groups of people. The theory and methodology used was Q methodology, to investigate attitudes to mass media reports on Queensland's Fitzgerald Inquiry. The three distinct areas are:
(i) Attitudes of opinion leaders toward mass media reports on the
Fitzgerald Inquiry;
(ii) Attitudes of news executives toward mass media reports on the
Fitzgerald Inquiry;
(iii) Attitudes of communication students toward mass media reports on the
Fitzgerald Inquiry.
The Fitzgerald Inquiry commenced in July 1987 and was initiated by the
Acting Premier of Queensland, the Hon. Bill Gunn. The commissioner of the inquiry was a respected, but publicly unknown, Q.C., Tony Fitzgerald. His task was to examine the issue of corruption within the Queensland police force. Media reports prior to this inquiry told of past inquiries which failed to uncover corruption. This Fitzgerald Inquiry did uncover corruption on a large scale and by the time it stopped taking evidence in
December 1988, 2,210 exhibits and 340 witnesses had come before the
Commissioner and his staff. The decision to make the inquiry public resulted in an 18 month media coverage. Few members of the public could avoid the issues involved in the inquiry nor the method by which they were being informed.
1 Q Methodology quantitatively and qualitatively measures subjective viewpoints of specific individuals called the Q population. With this methodology, correlations and differences between people's attitudes towards a subject can be measured. High correlations among respondents in attitudes about a topic are said to be on a factor. They become typologies (Stephen, 1953). Q Methodology and its particular application to this study is described at length in Chapter Three.
While the study is framed by a number of areas of interest developed from readings in mass media research, these areas did not necessarily control the direction of the findings. Q Methodology does not set up experiments with any predetermination or hypothesis. Rather, it yields an intuitive or abductive inference about general areas the researcher wishes to study
(Stephenson, 1961). The point should be made that in Q one does not set up attitudinal values and concepts against which groups and individuals can be measured (Karmatz, 1974). Rather, one examines factors represented by "n" opinions, to find underlying attitudes.
Theoretical Relevance
It was suggested in a number of news and current affairs interviews between April and November 1988 that the Fitzgerald Inquiry was a public inquiry only because of a widespread public concern that justice needs to be seen to be done. A reasonable assumption would be that elements of the government of the day agreed with this felt need or that the government was forced into a public inquiry as a result of media pressure. This study looked at how certain groups perceived the method by which the inquiry was made public. The interest of this study was not to survey large groups of opinion leaders, nor to analyse the content of mass
2 media. There was no intention to undertake any form of content analysis, nor to determine the legal or political undercurrents of the inquiry.
Rather, this study focused on the attitudes of certain populations as expressed by their relative agreement or disagreement with independently generated opinion statements concerning mass media reports on the inquiry.
Certainly the mass media reported consistently on the inquiry for a time span that made the Fitzgerald Inquiry a topic of household conversation.
This longevity of coverage on the corruption issue, with its "lead characters" and wide coverage, served as a basis to study attitudes toward mass media reporting on an issue.
A number of news selection areas that have long been the subject of research are useful parameters for the study, while using the Fitzgerald
Inquiry as a common focus. Empirical researchers have studied the mass media from numerous approaches, often facing variables which would cast doubt on results. Most studies need to narrow down a problem to a manageable size, with the natural limits on manpower, time, time span and geography.
Additionally, the analysis of respondents' scoring on scales is often called into question. The researcher must, when explaining or interpreting results, return to the original constructions of the scales which are placed upon the behaviour he or she is attempting to study. These definitions, which the researcher creates, essentially replace the subject's meaning with the researcher's. This results in a study of the constraints, rather than of the actual behaviour.
3 A Matter of Opinion
Stephenson distinguishes opinion as "the stuff of communication theory" and fact as "information theory". He asserts that communication is
"subjective to the person in the sense that opinions and not facts are at issue" (Stephenson, 1969, pp. 65-82). Prior experience has long been accepted as the basis on which people interpret new experience. Schramm put forward three of the possible scenarios to cover perception of communication:
1. The receiver will interpret the message in terms of his experience and
the ways he has learned to respond to it.
A tribesman, seeing an airplane, interprets it as a bird; that was the only experience within which the aircraft had meaning for them. A picture of a bull, seen by a Hindu, would probably be classified in terms of a religious frame of reference; seen by a Korean farmer, it might be organised in terms of farm work; seen by a Spaniard, it might be put into a sporting frame of reference; whereas to a Texan it might be seen against an experience of cattle-raising.
2. The receiver will interpret the message in such a way as to resist
change in strong personality structures.
Presented a story containing both viewpoints, or news favourable to both sides, each reader tends to remember the points favorable to his side.
4 3. "The receiver will tend to group characteristics in experience so as to make whole patterns. A picture of a hat protruding over a fence tends
too be perceived as a person wearing a hat and standing behind a fence" (Schramm, 1970, pp. 111-112).
While opinion will mean many people will see many things differently, it
is noted that opinion is a fickle thing. Doob acknowledged that people
hold incompatible beliefs about current issues without being in a state of
conflict:
"The responses which could give rise to conflict may not exist, may be evoked at different times, or may be of different strength. The hero of yesterday, for example, becomes the villain of today or is forgotten altogether not because people are people who are downright superficial or perversely whimsical but because their attitudes in the meantime have been altered as a result of experiences they have had" (Doob, 1970, p. 325).
Opinions And Attitudes
Opinions are more than the annunciation of attitudes. Indeed it is
unlikely, given the complexity of many issues which confront people, that
any single attitude could adequately serve as clear guidance. Opinion
arises from the melding of attitudes, constructed as they are from prior
experience, holding on tenuously until some method of subjective proof
can solidify the opinion into a newly formed attitude.
"It involves, or is based in part upon, attitudes; but it is not, therefore, synonymous with attitude. It is always concerned with doubtful elements in the situation, with conflicts and uncertainties, with problems or "issues", and is therefore a more rational construct" (Schramm, 1970, p. 222).
5 A clear path to attitudes is not easy. An expressed opinion may result from a grafting of attitudes, some the result of almost identical prior experience, some from a desire to conform to an organisational culture or perhaps from Media Consonance or Noelle-Neumann's Spiral of Silence
(discussed in Chapter Two). Few would doubt the complexity of attitude formation, and the identification of real attitudes is the function of this thesis. The complexity of attitude formation necessitates the use of
Q methodology, since it is most able to give some shape to attitudes.
"It would be remarkable if any two Q sorts, from different persons, were exactly alike; and unlikely that all will be totally different. It is the purpose of factor theory to determine which distributions, if any, are approximately alike, on the theory that they have the same eigenwerken, the same "characteristic value", the same feeling" (Stephenson, 1983).
6 CHAPTER 2 SECONDARY RESEARCH
Consonance and Dissonance
In forming attitudes toward media coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry, readers obtained a mixture of fact, hearsay, statements by the commissioner, editorials, comments by involved parties and individual journalists' stories. According to Lane and Sears, whenever someone is attempting to persuade another to adopt a point of view three basic sets of cognitions are involved for the receiver: the target's own opinion; an evaluation of the source of the influence; and a judgment of the source's position. When the three sets of cognitions are consistent with each other they are said to be "constant".
" The reverse of this situation, created by a conflict between a positive evaluation of the source and a negative evaluation of the position he holds (or vice versa - a negative evaluation of the source and a positive evaluation of his position), yields "cognitive dissonance" (Lane & Sears, 1964, pp. 44-45).
The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, developed by Leon Festinger, describes a state of psychological tension which motivates efforts to restore cognitions to a constant state. The impact of the dissonance would depend on the magnitude (or distance, if looked at on a continuum) of discrepancy from the individual's preferred state and the salience of the issue to the person.
7 Rationality and Rumour
History, according to Lane and Sears, is an important element in irrational thinking (Lane & Sears, 1964, pp. 73-77). As an issue comes nearer to the forefront of public attention, there is a higher likelihood of drawing irrational opinions. In other words, as salience increases, so too does irrational opinion. Lane and Sears cited the October 30, 1938,
"War of the Worlds" broadcast as a case in point. They proposed that individuals whose intellectual frame of reference allowed an expectation of strange and improbable events - such as the "Second Coming", "Acts of
God" or some other predisposition - would be more likely to believe in an invasion from Mars. Additionally the years preceding 1938 were ones of rapid social change, wide-spread unemployment and great personal insecurity. Attitudes supporting insecurity, anxiety and even panic were probably present and a serious threat of war was present. It is suggested that history (or prior experience) induced certain people to panic on the night of the broadcast.
In other words, people developed a propensity to believe in certain possibilities no matter how improbable. Put in the Fitzgerald Inquiry context, given the alleged failure of past corruption inquiries, the instigation of an effective corruption inquiry could have been seen as improbable by many. Yet others firmly believed that an effective inquiry such as the Fitzgerald Inquiry was possible and could be seen as a redeemer of past ills. Once the media were firm in their revelations about corruption through credible outlets of Queensland Newspapers and the
Australian Broadcasting Corporation, a condition was arrived at that might allow a groundswell of public interest.
8 Regardless of the fictitious nature of the facts in the broadcast of the "War of the Worlds", the information (not the facts) is important to opinion formation. This concept was endorsed by Stephenson's concept of
"information theory" discussed in Chapter One. Providing it was authoritatively sourced, information could be accepted without question and the exposition of "facts" about private lives could be accepted. This paper makes no judgment on such matters but it must be acknowledged that readers are not well versed in law and find difficulty in differing between hearsay and fact. As with McCarthyism in the United States, where statements by authorities could be blindly accepted, a lack of another side in any debate helps ensure acceptance of some views on more esoteric subjects.
It would seem reasonable to presume that irrationality and rumour could be linked. Research on rumour, along with a great deal of other research on psychological phenomena, came to prominence during World War II. As with the preconditions to the "War of the Worlds" broadcast, salience of such emotions as anxiety or fear could be presumed to have been high. Normal trust mechanisms would have been thrown aside, as secrecy, rationing and the focus on war took over. Gordon Allport and Leo Postman examined rumour in the 1940's:
"Whenever a stimulus field is of potential importance to an individual, but at the same time unclear, or susceptible of divergent interpretations, a subjective structuring process is started. Although the process is complex (involving, as it does, leveling, sharpening, and assimilation), its essential nature can be characterized as an effort to reduce the stimulus to a simple meaningful structure that has adaptive significance for the individual in terms of his own interests and experience. The process begins at the moment the ambiguous situation is perceived, but the effects are greatest if memory intervenes. The longer the time that elapses after the stimulus is perceived the greater the threefold change is likely to be. Also, the more people involved in a serial report, the greater the change is likely to be, until the rumour has reached an aphoristic brevity, and is repeated by rote" (Allport, Postman, 1970, p.154).
9 Certainly, when this was originally written, in 1947, television was not commonly thought of as a mass medium. But this writer contends its importance to attitudes regarding the Fitzgerald Inquiry is strong. The interaction between individuals outside their watching, listening and reading about issues has long been regarded as an important ingredient in persuasion. The 18-month coverage of the inquiry was certainly sufficient to set up and maintain strong rumour conditions.
Secondly, interviews with journalists disclosed that rumours within journalists' ranks invariably preceded much of what would only later be available to report from the Inquiry. Some rumours were accurate, some were proved wrong. One clear example was the belief that a star witness was "holed-up" in a safe-house near Brisbane, while officially he was overseas. Since it is likely that a great deal of information was neither readily nor legally available to the media prior to being heard in the Inquiry (along with obvious concerns of contempt and defamation), an environment conducive to rumour existed among journalists and other groups in a position "to know".
If the concepts of irrationality and rumour are taken together, it seems reasonable to propose that an environment was established in which individuals with "the right frame of mind" or attitudes were ready to believe anything (perhaps destructive) about individuals mentioned in the inquiry. As well, some may well have held a "lynch them" mentality, others a "thank God it's out in the open" and still others the view that
"a few innocent must suffer for the good of all". For example, the views on the guilt or innocence of the entire police force and of the government could be only infrequently mentioned in the mass media, while being frequently discussed within the rumour environment. Rumours would be
10 carried by all who were unsure of all facts, whether they were lawyers,
journalists or the general public. In short, the length of the inquiry and piecemeal style of information release to the public would support a rumour environment in which anyone could be an expert on the inquiry regardless of the incomplete nature of the evidence.
Empirical Research - News Selection
The path to research on news selection has been strong in the area of agenda-setting for some time. The following is an overview of research in the area of news selection to determine frames of reference to assist this study.
Hofstetter and Dozier describe news as accounts to inform citizens of the social and political worlds (Hofstetter & Dozier, 1986). Information which assists citizens to reach their individual ends is obviously useful and is therefore an opinion resource. The value of such an opinion resource lies in the "incidental elaboration" of social and political processes in which an event is embedded, as much as the event itself is.
The authors see news serving as an opinion resource when the following elements are present:
Instruction Consequences Pros and Cons
Process Political Process Attribution
Background Multiple Sources
11 Their study looked at sensationalism in television news, stemming, in part, from a concern that sensationalism in news exists because of the economics of local television. "Eyewitness" formats and chatty style were seen as reducing the quality of news. The study first questioned what the terms "sensationalism" and "quality" news meant.
Their operational meaning of sensational news involved two components: the coverage of unexpected events; and the inherent entertainment value of events. The content category of sensationalism and human interest included crime, violence, natural disasters, accidents and fires, as well as amusing, heartwarming, shocking and curious accounts.
Given this broad spectrum of news, as well as the lumping of sensationalism and human interest together, this writer notes that
Hofstetter and Dozier's explanation of what "sensationalism" (alone) is, remains unclear. No attempt seems to have been made to define "quality" news.
As an overview, their study found that sensational news contained elements of quality news which would act as an effective opinion resource for the viewer. It was also found that neither type provided much information about sources of information or viewpoints on events, issues, or analysis. But they did provide elements relating to social and political action such as process, background and consequences. From Hofstetter and
Dozier's study, amongst other things, it was observed that the traditional cannons of "objective" news such as attribution of source, the attribution
12 of multiple sources and discussion of the pros and cons of events appear less frequently than other forms of story construction, denying opportunities to allow evaluation of the information. It would seem the question of sensationalism in news needs to be studied in a less pre-defined way, since different people have different views on what sensationalism is.
News Sources
News sourced to official channels provides the majority of incidental and planned news. Tan (1985) discussed DuBick's findings that the organisational structure of assigning "rounds" to reporters routinized the coverage of news. It could be suggested from this that such practice broadly defines the flow of news. DuBick considered that since to find news, journalists seek information from organisational centres of society, this naturally leads to an increase in the volume of reporting of these centres. The tendency to use authoritative sources ensures a journalist's need to use an information mediator such as a public relations person, a police officer, a fireman or some other "official".
The volume of information available from established organisations provides an overwhelming amount of information from subjective areas. The ability of a journalist to provide an objective presentation of sourced material must depend on the professional orientation of the journalist, which could involve neutral and participant values.
13 Neutral Vs Participant Values
A study by John Henningham (1982) examined neutral "gatekeeping" values and participant "advocacy" values. Henningham looked at attitudes and characteristics of 215 television journalists.
Neutral values predominated in commercial news and were commonly found among key decision-makers. Older journalists and newcomers held more neutral values, while journalists in their late 20's with more than five years experience in journalism had strong participant values. It should be noted that at any one stage, journalists may hold both participant and neutral values.
Demographics were apparently unimportant. Sex and socio-economic background could not be used to explain differences, nor could a considerable range of education, with the exception of post-graduates who were mainly participant. It seems likely that journalists targeted in this Fitzgerald Inquiry study should hold more neutral values, given that journalists in this Q study averaged 15 years' experience.
A study by Bohle (1986) hypothesized (i) when asked to rate the importance of a positive and negative version of the same story, journalists would tend to rate the negative version as being more important, and (ii) when forced to choose between a positive and a negative version of the same story for publication, journalists would tend to select the negative.
Negative news was defined as "information about events, objects or other referents which are themselves generally considered to be unpleasant or harmful". Categories might include frauds, war and disputes.
14 The first hypothesis was only slightly supported while the second was more strongly supported. Bohle suggests that journalists often select negative news because it holds more valued information or alternately because it is less ambiguous. Negative news is seen as "vivid" and easy to recognise during a busy news day. Further, it is suggested that police and other types of officials provide such "bad news" at regular briefings or through releases, making it easy to gather. Essentially, he is suggesting that the universe of available information in which a journalist works is biased toward "bad news". For this study, bad news is considered to be news which has some harmful effect on people or institutions and would be seen as having more "presence" in the audience's cognition.
It seems likely that conflict, usually having at least two sides, will provide at least one negative aspect to someone. In a sense the agenda has already been written for the journalist, and his or her research is easier since the conflicting parties will often be eager to offer information. Coupled with an audience's interest in negative news, it becomes a more economical story for the media than one which must be painstakingly researched.
Media Consonance
In their text, Milestones in Mass Communication Research, Shearon Lowery and Melvin De Fleur (1983) point to Bernard Cohen's "quotable" quote, "The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling readers what to think about". They added the analysis by Mccombs and Shaw: "Audiences not only learn about public issues and other matters from the media, they also learn how much importance to attach to an issue or topic from the emphasis the media place upon it" (381).
15 Lowery and De Fleur identify the dependent variable as the level of importance that audiences attach to topics and issues covered by the media. This level or degree of importance is an essential component in the significance that people attach to media items. They suggest that an important part of "agenda setting" is the process of news selection commonly described as "gatekeeping". One further area described by Lowery and De Fleur as closely associated with agenda setting is the degree to which the meanings attached to issues by the public play a part in formulating public policy. By this, they suggest a scenario in which the media emphasize a particular topic to the stage that the public comes to believe the issue to be truly important, then politicians decide to take action in the appropriate direction of public concern. Clearly, this is a strong issue to be pursued in examining coverage on the Fitzgerald
Inquiry.
Tan (1985) suggests that the formation of public opinion depends on the amount and the nature of information an individual acquires. The processes of selective exposure and selective perception could lead to stabilization or change of opinion. He emphasizes the media's agenda setting ability to influence the public's perception of which issues are important to hold opinions about.
Two conditions under which Tan (based on studies by Noelle-Neumann) asserts the media can influence the public by changing its opinions are media consonance and the individual's perception of what others are thinking. Consonance is the condition under which a majority of media areas agree on an issue and publish/broadcast the issue in a similar light.
16 The combination of the two conditions form Noelle-Neumann's Spiral of Silence. The human fear of being isolated from others of their own kind appears to extend to a fear of opinion isolation. The "spiral of silence" develops from a self-fulfilling prophecy by some members of the public who, fearing their own views would have little support, choose to remain silent while a different view appears to be the strongest in the public eye. This "strengthened" view therefore appears to have greater public support than it truly has.
Riffe et al. examined the similarity of topics in newscasts of the three major US television networks (Riffe, Ellis, Rogers, Van Ommeren, and
Woodman, 1986). Despite the competition among the networks, they were found to rival each other only in conformity. This was described as shared news judgment on how best to serve the audience. The study followed on from Stemple's (1985) notion that the only true differences are found in specific stories, rather than in categories.
Riffe et al. argued that story duplication is functional by "focusing a pluralistic public's attention on common threats and, in some cases, building consensus". Duplication, according to Riffe, is in part an unavoidable result of the demand for "interesting visuals". The consideration of a "good story" includes its on-screen action. The reinforcement of agenda setting is, the report suggests, enhanced by media consonance. In addition, reference is made to Altheide's "Three-in-One
News" study of the coverage of Iran hostage story, and its interesting conclusion that duplication "amounts" to a national news service
(Altheide, 1982, pp.482-486). Essentially the media are monolithic in news selection.
17 Altheide concluded that the three major networks presented an almost
identical message regarding the holding of American hostages. This extended to "the most minute characterizations of the historical and more current issues and events, few divergent presentations were available to discerning viewers''. Altheide points to a concern or even fear for the hidden problems a "national news service" would have, given the few limited views on events and issues that would result. Although Altheide's findings are worth noting, a distinction should be made about the ability of any network to cover an overseas story more efficiently than a local or even national story. The lack of a functioning network of journalists and crews must limit the scope of news coverage with correspondents, who must therefore select from very few information sources in a foreign country.
Often these sources are government-controlled and are limited by what they are allowed to cover, reinforcing DuBick's view of the limitations facing journalists' so called authoritative sources. In the Queensland
Fitzgerald Inquiry, news units were abundant but their method of information gathering was restricted to the single source - the inquiry.
Common socialization of newspeople, common definitions of news and reliance on the same suppliers of news copy are the reasons given by Riffe et al. for the standardization of news mix. They suggest that television's formalized news-gathering procedures and organisational structures all contribute to "content sameness". It was concluded from the research that there was a similarity in the "view of the world" shown by each organisation's newscast. In addition, this world was found to be surprisingly small, with a heavy domestic orientation. Although there was a reasonable amount of variation in length and placement, few real differences were found beyond differences in judgment of the treatment of
18 specific events. Riffe concluded that regardless of the qualitative differences, such as reliance on specific sources, overt gestures and other factors which influence differences between coverage of individual events, the "annual topic mix comparisons indicate nearly identical news judgment on what a newscast should contain".
Tan (1985, pp. 324-325) also noted Mccombs and Shaw's work on agenda setting, in particular the conclusion that increased media salience regarding an issue or topic causes increased salience among the public.
From the discussion provided by Tan, it seems likely that exposure of issues and topics by the media leads to gains in knowledge by the audience. This is qualified however, by Palmgreen's findings that this gain in audience knowledge is more effective on national, rather than local coverage. Local coverage stimulated interpersonal discussion about the local issue, which then increased knowledge even further. What appears to give a synergistic effect is the interpersonal communication that builds Allport and Postman's rumour.
Issue Salience
The media takes on the role of examining government issues which are relevant to the public, if complex, to enable the non-specialist public to make "informed decisions". While acknowledging the necessity of the public to seek information from the mass media, Gadir (1982) points to
Lazarsfeld and Merton's statement that: The mass media confer status on public issues, persons, organisations and social movements.
19 An audience assumes a story is important as a consequence of the time or space allocated to it. Gadir discussed a study by Mccombs and Shaw [1972] of the 1968 US Presidential election and he concluded that the idea of agenda setting asserts that the priorities of the press to some degree become the priorities of the public. The study hypothesised that the relative priorities of the media are internalised by the public.
The Priorities Model was used to operationalize this hypothesis. People were asked what they were most concerned about and a list of issues was constructed. This was then compared to a list of issues taken from the media at the same fixed point in time through content analysis. The lists are then rank-order correlated as total agendas for comparisons of similarities and differences.
This agenda setting research involves three stages:
[1] separate measures of people's opinions
[2] the content analysis of media and
[3] their subsequent comparison.
A number of operational problems may arise, such as the types of assumptions needed for each study. Researchers may use different media time-spans, numbers of issues, closed or open-ended questions and definitions for content analyses. Gadir argues for an issue-specific approach to agenda setting in attempt to avoid conflicting findings.
20 Since the media are regarded by the public as reflecting the beliefs of "others", the agenda setting influence is facilitated. In such a case,
the non-media guides for opinion to the contrary are either non-operative
or weak. For example, traditional identification with one political party
could inhibit the effects of media.
The main shortcoming of the model is its tacit assumption that at any
point in time the public would follow a particular media agenda in a way
which would reflect the relative position of each and every issue. This is
unlikely, given the variance of interest of large sections of the
community. However, as some issues rise in an individual's priorities, others will be displaced. The media could be said to influence the overall
public agenda through a process of activation and de-activation of issues.
Gadir is saying that to the extent that people take cues from the media
concerning important issues, individuals alter interests one issue at a
time. As issues differ in emotional and intellectual appeal, so to do
their staying power.
Over time, the public agenda does approximate the media agenda. Yet this will not be evident at any given point in time since the media do not directly cover issues, but events. Only events (or pseudo-events) make an
issue worth reporting. For example, the issue of unemployment is never
reported without impetus - such as a newsworthy personality making a statement or the release of statistics. Alternately, the media use an
issue to create an event - and ask the "right" questions so that the political leader may respond in a manner which will create news.
21 The objectives of Gadir's study were: (1) to provide evidence for the general process of agenda-setting, (2) to illustrate and support the issue-activation approach and (3) to identify affective and partisan elements as well as other variables which enhance or inhibit issue-activation.
The 1978 study found the media agenda was much less stable over time than the public agenda. Substantial differences were found, such as the media preference for industrial disputes ranked #1 versus the public agenda ranked #4-5. Defence ranked #10 with the public, yet #4 with television.
Corruption and automation were ranked #3-4 by television yet did not even appear within the first 10 of the public.
Despite a journalist's personal agenda, his or her professional role of reporting ad hoc newsworthy events of ten takes precedence over long-established "real" issues. Over time, Gadir says that the public and media agenda will approximate each other as a result of "a communality of issue priorities which is a function of socio-cultural similarities between the public and media gatekeepers as well as a function of their mutual dependencies". He suggests an issue-specific analysis is most likely to detect a media to public influence.
22 Using graphs to provide visual comparisons, it was found that some issues
are better agenda-setting material than others. Gadir says the mass media can
only activate issues which can be made relevant. He pointed to Ilengar's view
that agenda-setting by the media could be limited to the more peripheral and
remote issues that are beyond the bounds of personal experience.
Henningham's "Looking at Television News" (1988) points to considerable
separations in agenda preferences between journalists and television
viewers. Henningham looked at agenda from three viewpoints; journalists'
average interest, journalists' estimates of viewer interest and viewers'
average interest. Of fifteen news categories, crime rated seventh for
journalists interest, fifth for their impression of viewer interest and
seven for actual viewer interest. Politics rated third, eleventh and
sixth respectively while famous people rated twelfth, third and twelfth.
Within current affairs categories politics rated second, eighth and ninth. The difference suggests that viewers are less interested in
analysis (the domain of current affairs) than direct reports on politics.
Henningham did not include crime within the current affairs category but
added a category on scandals with rankings of first, first and eighth.
Frauds were ranked fourth, second and sixth. It is should be noted that viewer interests appear to drift well away from journalists' in these areas which could be called sensational.
23 Chapter Conclusion
This chapter covered a limited number from a reasonably wide range of studies on behaviour, reaction and effects. In general, studies have, for whatever reason, varied sufficiently as to rarely pursue any particular issue to a conclusive finding. Methodologies vary and in many cases glaring omissions are obvious. Insufficient justification is provided as a rationale for many decisions on descriptors and categories within content analyses methodology. And the limitations of many studies result in the omission of important considerations.
It seems odd that studies test a concept of subjective/investigative journalism with "handout" questionnaires - something which could be likened to a news release by another gatekeeper. No attempts are made to find out how journalists interpret the questionnaires. Nevertheless, all areas covered have been of considerable interest and are invaluable as ideas for further study using alternative methods.
24 CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Stephenson says that mass communication allows people to be involved in "subjective play". He deduces that people must enjoy reading, watching, viewing and listening because they devote so much time to those activities. Crucial to Stephenson's work on Play Theory is to distinguish between the concepts of social control and convergent selectivity. He sees public opinion as important to social control, where a majority of people must agree or be persuaded to agree to similar constructs. Confergent selectivity, however, allows each person to choose different things for himself or herself. All may agree to a need for fresh breath, but the method of arriving at this can easily vary.
Advertising operates on this principle. Essentially, Stephenson looks at mass media as agents of entertainment, rather than of persuasion
(Stephenson, 1967). Stephenson states that communication via mass communication is received by individuals, not audiences. Such communication is in a tripartite context of the person (X), the media or social mechanism (Y) and the event or message (Z).
The interaction of XYZ results in notions, ideas, attitudes and beliefs of a person and as such the ideal primary data are the person's self-referent statements. A collection of these statements for a particular XYZ situation makes up a Q-population which can then be used in a Q-sort by X
(or any other X) to provide homologous self-descriptions of X's notions, beliefs ideas and attitudes. When correlated and factored, Stephenson states, they provide an objective basis for classification and comparative study for an XYZ situation, whether for one X or many
(Stephenson, 1967).
25 The statements are opinion statements and represent surface feelings of individuals. According to Stephenson, opinions are disputable areas, subjective and lacking in proof.
" .•• they are primarily self-referent - "In my opinion," one says, "China is warlike". A person is speaking his own mind. To maintain instead that "China is warlike" is to imply a generalized statement of belief, without self-reference, like repeating th4t 2+2=4" (Stephenson, 1969, pp.72).
However, again according to Stephenson, public opinion can be characterized by the notion that people may say one thing in public but hold some other view in private, an idea that seems to support
Noelle-Neumann's concept of "The Spiral of Silence". Stephenson sees this as a condition of status quo or latent opinion versus "real" or latent opinion. When these opinions are congruent for the general population, the opinion can be held to be "sovereign". Q Methodology allows the myriad views to be dealt with operantly. 1 Stephenson states that it is essential to look at belief systems (values) to support explanations of opinion and attitude formation. He asserts that Q method has been used to show that attitudes remain the same and may simply appear (e.g. during a crisis). Application of political decisions to opinion polls are seen as constraining rather than astute.
1 "There is no operational definition of status quo or any other opinion in the ad hoc categorical manner of present-day attitude measurement •.•• Instead Q sorts are performed under a given condition of instruction, but only the facts count, i.e. what the individual provides as his operant view. Factors are first found in the Q method, and then interpreted. In categorical testing, a test is defined (i.e. given an interpretation) and then measurements are made with it according to that prior definition."
26 "Broadly, there seem to be few basic belief-systems in a culture; there are many different ways of being attitudinal with respect to them, however; and there are innumerable self-statements of opinion about these.
Thus it is operationally and theoretically necessary to distinguish opinions as items of Q populations (the mycelium domain), attitudes as Q factors, and belief systems as explanations pro tern (subject to additional, more 'primitive testing' of these factors" (Stephenson, 1969, p.75).
Q Methodology
This study looks at attitdues held by individuals to see whether they form belief groups. To do this, it used Q Methodology, which is a different methodology from those which are commonly used in studies on news selection. Where R-technique is used to factor a set of variables collected from a number of individuals, Q-technique is used to factor a number of individuals from variables collected from the same individuals.
In short, individuals rather than data are factored.
Three preliminary groups were selected from quite distinct kinds of individuals - opinion leaders, journalists and students. Then the opinions of the individuals as opposed to the group type were sorted. There were no hypotheses, but when the data were analysed, as in regression or factor analysis, clusters of similar attitudes were identified. These clusters clearly indicated individuals who think along similar lines on the issue and have common social values.
27 Operant subjectivity, or the measurement of subjectivity, differs from scaling and questionnaire methodologies. A person's judgment is always his or her own viewpoint, so there is no right or wrong direction, unlike a scale response.
The items are presented to respondents and systematically weighed using their own (subjective) values. Each respondent operates within his or her own world. The information then provided is a "captured" belief system on a particular subject. In this study, each respondent ordered the 44 provided statements in a fashion that required 44 + 43 + 42 + 41 + n decisions to be made about values.
The researcher's ability to define and measure plays no part in the individual's decision or own point of view. The R research types previously mentioned have looked for responses to match defined concepts. The operant Q method takes observations first, and then attaches concepts. The lack of concepts preceding observations avoids many problems found in constructing effects. Therefore this study is intended to provide an alternative approach to news media R research within Australia. It is also intended that the probability of similarities in viewpoints amongst readers, gatekeepers and opinion leaders should provided a suitable base for future studies.
As previously mentioned, the Fitzgerald Inquiry was selected because of its wide coverage over a considerable time span. It could be presumed that the
Inquiry had a higher saliency for certain opinion leaders, such as politicians, than for communication students. But the way in which it was reported and received may have led to differences in attitude groupings.
28 Scope and Limitations
There is a limitation, in one sense, that the results of this study cannot be projected to all segments of the population. Nevertheless, it is possible to predict that there are other groups which hold these values.
A Q study addresses an individual's attitude to a series of opinions only at one particular point in time. Because of this, some may see the lack of predictability as a weakness. However, while the results may not be predicted statistically, they can be generalized in that one can say these typologies exist in the broader population.
" ••• although the populations might be ill-assorted, heterogeneous, and unrepresentative, the statistical universes derived from them could be orderly and amenable to precise formulations" (Stephenson, 1953, p.64).
This study, as with other Q studies, uses a Q sample as a means of establishing the "best approach" into the issue of media coverage on the
Fitzgerald Inquiry. The nature of Q studies suggests that the Q samples which result from initial interviews may lead to alternate paths. The opinion statements are typical expressions and contribute to discovering attitudes. The concepts previously addressed, such as negativism, could be reflected in one or more, or no factors.
The Q sort cannot force respondents into accepting a particular category since it limits analysis to an examination of only the most significant choices most agreed upon and most disagreed upon statements. The most appealing aspect of Q is that respondents make their own value judgments.
This means the results are not forced into pre-selected categories as with content analysis. Forced distribution is not mandatory with Q, but when used, it requires respondents to balance their value judgments and establish salience. But it does not force respondents into categories.
29 The study was limited to three specific groups of 25. While a greater number in a sample may discern more factors, it was felt that this is an acceptable level of sampling for this study. The study looked at similarities and differences among senior journalists, opinion leaders and communication students. The students may aspire to be journalists or opinion leaders, but as yet have not experienced the socialization processes experienced by either of the other groups. Returns (15) from journalists were not as high as expected.
Interest remained high with all but one journalist, who was against this type of study. Opinion leaders (16) identified the same concern. Student responses were limited to 16. Fewer Q statements, say 36, would have greatly reduced the time needed to complete a Q sort but would have provided less information to work with. Nevertheless, Q is designed for small sample sizes, because the information bits from each respondent are enormous ( [44+43+42+ •.• n]x47 ).
The populations involved in this study are observed in a particular communication process, an XYZ model. In this case X is the variable or audience; Y is the medium or social mechanism; and Z is the range of news stories on the Fitzgerald Inquiry or message. The XYZ interaction represents the current attitude.
30 There were 47 cases, so X = 47; Y = mass media coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry and Z = the message as conveyed through the Q statements. The XYZ interaction can be segmented into a number of attitudinal patterns by the
Q population. With an optimum solution, each person from the population will fall into a particular attitudinal pattern or type.
A Q factor can be thought of as a stereotype, a kind of person or population exhibiting a number of common characteristics toward a particular subject. This type consists of all individuals who fall onto one particular factor (Stephenson, 1967, pp.33-34).
Q technique allows for a sample of objects to be placed in a particular order which is significant to a single person. This order will be referred to as a Q sort. When a number of Q sorts have been gathered, they can be correlated and factor-analyzed on computer. The factors indicate clusters of individuals who have ranked statements similarly - agreeing with or disagreeing with the same statements. The factors can then be explained in terms of the commonly shared attitudes reflected in the statements.
Each factor is a model of a different viewpoint. As such, each points to persons who resemble each other in terms of subjectively shared viewpoints.
The general technique used in a Q study is to select a sample of 30 to 60 people to become the Q population. Some are interviewed regarding their opinions on a given topic. A limited number of statements in the form of opinions are then selected from the interview data. These statements are general value judgments for or against a subject or object. The same population is then asked to react positively or negatively to each opinion
31 statement in self-referent terms. Essentially this is a synthetic proposition into which different meanings and values may be read but the agreement or disagreement is salient and is measured. Although Q statements often come from the Q population, it is also acceptable to use additional opinions from other sources, through either primary or secondary means of data gathering (Karmatz, 1971).
Statement Selection
Stephenson says that comprehension, the outcome of communication, may be quite different from the facts composing it.
"A concourse for a psychological event .•• consists of separating statements of fact from statements of opinion (self-reference), and recognizing that a collection of the latter can represent, theoretically, the complex subjectivity of the individual and the event" (Stephenson, 1988).
The problem for this study, then, was to develop statements which could assist in determining various attitudes toward media coverage. The research provided in Chapter Two is useful for theoretical discussion but is not final in identifying categories for this Q study. In fact, the data provided in this study should provide material for further analysis in a number of future studies.
32 To identify a concourse of opinion, three principles outlined by F. N.
Karmatz (1974, p.63) were: comprehensiveness, representativeness, and exclusiveness of categories. Comprehensiveness, in this case, was to include a broad range of media research topics as was feasible for this type of study. Representativeness involved the selection of topics that are commonly discussed and reasonably cover the styles of coverage of the inquiry. Exclusiveness involved the development of discrete categories so that topics can be easily classified. It should be noted that soome overlap is likely. Additionally, it is not anticipated that respondents would easily identify categories. Therefore the category design is significant only in fulfilling these three principles.
In this study, interviews were conducted with media gatekeepers to determine opinion statements. This was done to identify what some journalists say they do in providing news and their justification for doing so. Additional interviews were then conducted with non-media individuals to assess what such people say news services provide, and the reasons why they understand this is done. Interviews varied from fifteen minutes to three hours in duration. In all cases notes were taken on the opinions expressed by interviewees. The universe of opinion statements taken from the three kinds of individuals were then examined to determine tentative categories. These categories were guided by, but not limited to, research found in Chapter Two.
After analysis of the interview data and the subsequent linking to concepts identified in previous research on mass media, the following categories were developed to assist in looking at prevailing attitudes.
33 The categories were:
(A) Salience
To look at what is relevant and the level of relevance of media
coverage of the inquiry to those involved in the study.
(B) Media Consonance
To look at the concept, raised by Tan, of journalists' common "news
sense",
(C) Credibility
To look at the concept of the journalist's professional stance as a
conduit of information.
(D) Negativism
To look further at concepts raised by Boyle.
(E) Sensationalism
To look further at concepts raised by Hofstetter and Dozier.
(F) Redundant Theming
To look at the concept of a "playing out" of the issue because of a
social need for "cleansing", whilst a simultaneous understanding
exists that many of the highly-placed criminals will elude justice.
This was drawn from primary rather than secondary research.
(G) Voyeurism
To look at the concept of an audience's social want for voyeuristic
material. This also was drawn from primary research and is to ensure a
differentiation can be made between media-generated "sensationalism".
34 Statements were then refined to remove ambiguity and a culling procedure was undertaken to give a reasonable spread of statements in each category.
An equal number of statements was not intended, since it was decided to reflect the bias of categories identified in field interviews. In forming each statement, it was necessary to maintain a generic approach to the
Fitzgerald Inquiry reports, resting on common news selection areas rather than covering specific cases or personalities. A final refining process provided a balance of positive and negative statements. It must be understood that this could only be done subjectively and may be perceived differently from one person to the next. However, based on interviews, a judgment was made. The news selection categories previously discussed were represented by a series of opinion statements as follows:
(A) SALIENCE
1. If the Fitzgerald Inquiry stopped getting startling new testimony, then
media coverage would fizzle, regardless of the scope of criminal
activity.
2. The media usually report an account of criminal activity addressed in
the Fitzgerald Inquiry if the activity is on a larger or more bizarre
scale that that reported previously.
3. Brisbane criminal activity covered in the Fitzgerald Inquiry is more
likely to be reported in Queensland's largest newspaper than accounts
of criminal activity outside the Brisbane area.
4. Journalists will, "in the public interest", report matters from the
Fitzgerald Inquiry each day, regardless of real public interests.
5. A common belief is that the Fitzgerald Inquiry is of little interest to
most people in Queensland.
35 (B) MEDIA CONSONANCE 1. The media are primarily responsible for the present inquiry into
corruption in Queensland.
2. The media are the only effective watchdogs on corruption in Queensland.
3. It has only been the media's persistent statement that the inquiry into
corruption be public that has kept the Fitzgerald Inquiry from being
behind closed doors.
4. Journalists have an inherent understanding of what the public want.
5. Journalists are invariably sure of their research before they break a
story.
6. Most journalists think alike about what they consider to be newsworthy,
but there is no evidence to suggest that the public agrees.
7. Journalists are like a pack of hounds, all sniffing out the same trail.
They consider this to be a virtue.
8. Unless a story on the Fitzgerald Inquiry is addressed in the headlines
of a radio or television bulletin, or is in the first three pages of a
newspaper, it won't be worth reading.
9. A journalist's idea of public reaction is measured by whether or not
more than ten phone calls or letters to the editor follow.
10. Journalists are always flying kites on news stories in an attempt to
get controversial statements.
(C) CREDIBILITY
1. The public ranks journalists low in professionalism and this could be
attributed to a lack of in-depth stories.
2. Journalists can easily be fooled by their sources.
36 3. People in professional areas say that journalists can't handle
complicated stories, as their level of accuracy drops with the
complexity of the story.
4. News producers have been tricked into reporting negative matters
surrounding the process of the Fitzgerald Inquiry without adequately
researching the matter.
5. The media's reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry are more controlled by
the Fitzgerald Inquiry team than most people believe.
(D) VOYEURISM
1. More often than not, the media are only interested in people to exploit
them for the benefit of a story.
2. Journalists just pick the most titillating elements of the Fitzgerald
Inquiry for reports to the public.
3. The media should be less strident in calls for apparently corrupt
officials to be sacked before the Inquiry is completed.
4. Journalists are more interested in getting good colourful quotes than
in portraying an accurate picture of a story.
5. Journalists prefer writing controversial rather than non-controversial
stories.
6. I usually only pay any real attention to stories on the Fitzgerald
Inquiry if it relates to aspects of someone's private life.
(E) SENSATIONALISM
1. The media is guilty of using headlines to exaggerate the findings of
the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
2. I only pay attention to reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry if the media
sensationalize it.
37 3. I am more interested to hear controversy about the Fitzgerald Inquiry
than the actual evidence.
4. It is always good to hear Fitzgerald reprimand parties outside the
Inquiry, because it shows the public spirit of the inquiry.
5. The media's attempts to spice up the Fitzgerald Inquiry are boring, and
I am only interested if the accused are brought to justice.
6. Most people find it offensive that the media reports hearsay concerning
the intimate details of private lives of officials mentioned in the
Fitzgerald Inquiry.
7. Reporters try to make stars of themselves by exploiting the Fitzgerald
Inquiry, even though the information given out is for everyone to see.
(F) REDUNDANT THEMING
1. Unless the media continue to report the Fitzgerald Inquiry, corruption
within the police force will return.
2. Reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry are boring, but people need to follow
it to remind us all that justice is being done.
3. The net result of the media's coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry is a
"media trial" of some scapegoats, while they let the big fish go free.
4. If there is corruption within the Queensland Police, the media usually
sniffs it out and reports it.
5. Most people in Queensland want to be kept up-to-date about the
Fitzgerald Inquiry by the media on a daily basis.
6. It is not possible to understand the process of the Fitzgerald Inquiry
without monitoring the news each working day.
7. People cannot keep up-to-date on the Fitzgerald Inquiry by monitoring
the electronic media alone.
38 (G) NEGATIVISM
1. Journalists like reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry to be ever present
in the news because of the frequency of embarrassing stories that the
Inquiry generates.
2. Reports in the media would lead the public to believe that most
Queensland Police Officers want the Inquiry to get rid of corrupt
police.
3. The media has shown that the Police Union has effectively protected
corrupt police by maintaining Union policies regarding benefits to
officers.
4. Media reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry are more likely to show the
damaging side of police life, rather than talk of the benefits which
are resulting.
The next stage of primary research was conducted in mailings to two categories. The three types were: opinion leaders - from state parliament, industry, commerce and government; gatekeepers - in the form of news editors, producers and chiefs of staff from the news media; and third year communication students from QIT. Students were approached in class, but were asked to complete the Q sort in their own time. The researcher contacted the other two groups by telephone to gain initial agreement.
Documentation (see appendix) with instruction sheet, Q sort form, Q statement cards, demographic survey and return envelope was then forwarded to each respondent by post or hand delivery. All returns were by post and an envelope code was used to identify respondents. Phone call follow-ups were then made. It appears that three media and two opinion leader returns were lost in the mail system.
39 Each respondent was asked via an instruction sheet to sort 44 opinion statements, individually typed on separate cards. Following these instructions, the respondents would, over a 35 minute period, provide a Q sort (in the schematic form of an inverted pyramid, which was coded for later identification of the respondent type) representing attitudes they hold on mass media reporting of the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
The individuals were asked to sort the cards in a way that ensured that the statements they most agree and most disagree with were placed at the
"shallow" ends of the pyramid. An example is provided in the appendix.
These statements were then weighted so that the clusters could be formed according to these strongest opinion statements.
40 CHAPTER 4 INTERPRETATION OF STATISTICAL VALUES
The raw data' from the three groups were entered in a DEC 10 for manipulation, using the Quanal computer program1 • The first step is to transpose data from R to Q format. The computer printout of the Q data provides a correlation matrix showing a comparison of each person with every other person within the Q population. It was anticipated that clusters would form to identify clear attitude groupings. In addition, variances are also part of the program. This allows one to look at similarities and differences among individuals.
These data were then concatonated with the 44 opinion statements and run on Quanal. Examination of printouts revealed the most discrete factors with the three-factor solution using the oblimax rotation. The three chosen eigenvalues were 11.6640, 5.3479 and 1.8640. Rank of association matrix was 29.14. 2
1, The control summary includes a pre-processor phase, input matrix was transposed, correlation and principal factoring phase was set to extract three and then a second of four factors. Rotation phases included Oblimax and Varimax rotations. An Oblimax or Varimax solution can be visualized as a line, within a model using a three dimensional axis, connecting people (represented as correlation points) with similar belief systems. The Oblimax solution seeks clusters of people in orthagonal (90°) steps while the Varimax solution is arbitrary. The bipolar splitting criterion was 25.00 and the consensus item criterion was 1.000.
2 • Each eigenvalue has an associated eigenvector (a column of numbers); the eigenvalue is actually the sum of the squared elements of the eigenvector. Eigenvalues and eignevectors are used to construct a formula that duplicates the information contained in the matrix. (Wimmer & Dimmock, 1983, p.233).
41 Percentages of variance accounted for within the three-factor solution were 61.7% (0.6179), 28.3% (0.2833), and 9.8% (0.0987). Five factors were suggested by Scree test and six by common variance test but this is considered high when compared to other Q studies. The solution was optimized after three iterations. The final criterion was 0.0246199.
Factor 2 was 29.97% negative and negative items were extracted, made positive and formed into type 4 (0), factor 3 was 44.56% negative and negative items were extracted, made positive and formed into type 5.
After this, types three and four contained no subjects and were eliminated.
The "simple structure matrix" reveals the correlation of the population on all three factors. Significant members of each factor are identified.
Item # 34, for example, is strong on type two and three but is significantly stronger on two (0.524 Vs 0.463). Item# 40 is also stronger on type two, although the difference is not as great (0.495 Vs
0.461). Further examination of these variables may be required. With two exceptions all correlations listed on the "simple structure matrix" agree with the typologies provided under "variable assignments with factor weights by type". The two exceptions are variables# 1 and# 18. In each case the weak Z-score 3 suggests type one, rather than three, would have been more appropriate. However, these variables have little weight on whatever factor they fall.
3, Z-scores are the distances of each item on the factor from the mean. They give salience of an item to a type. Each factor or type prioritizes its values through these scores. The linking of these opinions is what characterize attitudes.
42 Beyond these weaknesses in the statistical solution, three clear factors resulted: the first with 19 variables; the second with 17 variables; and the third with 11 variables. Table 4.1 provides correlations between types showing no particularly strong correlation between types. If one considers 0.400 significant there are some similarities between types one and three. 4
TABLE 4.1
Correlations between types
1 2 3
1 1.000 0.306 0.420
2 0.306 1.000 0.378
3 0.420 0.378 1.000
Factor one is closest numerically (.420) (though reasonably distant) to factor three and somewhat more distant from factor two. Factor two is further from factor three than factor one is. The comparisons shown here are useful later to aid in characterizing personality types and typifying behaviour patterns.
4 " correlation coefficients are extremely susceptible to sampling fluctuations when samples are small and relatively large coefficients may occur due to chance alone. For example, nearly 15 percent of random samples of size 10 from a normal bivariate population in which there is no correlation would be expected to yield product moment cofficients of .40 or more + 1.000 is statistically perfect thus .40 is a 40% fit on opinions. (Tate, 1970, p.140)
Showing correlation estimates the values of one variable against another variable and allows the analysis of relationships of two or more variables.
43 The "item description" printout (see appendix) is the major section available
for interpretation. It provides data to identify consensus and differences between types on any Q statement. This shows what individuals on a factor have
in common. Colour coding has been added to item descriptions in the appendix to enable identification of categories (salience, credibility etc.) to Q
statements. Table 4.2 provides eight significant consensus items which were extracted by independent calculation. TABLE 4.2 EIGHT CONSENSUS ITEMS AND AVERAGE Z SCORES (CRITERION IS 1.000) ITEM DESCRIPTION AVERAGE Z
10. The media are primarily responsible 2.0 for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland.
9. Brisbane criminal activity covered in the 1. 7 Fitzgerald Inquiry is more likely to be reported in Queensland's largest newspaper than accounts of criminal activity outside the Brisbane area.
41. Journalists prefer writing controversial 1. 5 rather than non-controversial stories.
1. Media reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry 1. 3 are more likely to show the damaging side of police life rather than talk of the benefits which are resulting.
6. The media are guilty of exaggerating the - 1. 2 findings of the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
29. I only pay attention to reports on the - 1. 3 Fitzgerald Inquiry if the media sensationalize it.
26. I usually only pay any real attention - 1. 5 to stories on the Fitzgerald Inquiry if it relates to aspects of someone's private life.
30. I am more interested to hear controversy - 1.5 about the Fitzgerald Inquiry than the actual evidence.
44 Following the ''item description'' printout are three printouts providing
"item descriptions and descending array of z-scores for type .•. ". They provide consensus items within each factor. For example, factor one shows nine strong positive items. The items are: 10, 12, 01, 13, 35, 41, 11, 42 and 33. An initial observation suggests that the statements offer strong support for vigilant journalism.
There are six significant negative consensus statements. The items are:
22, 30, 05, 06, 29 and 26. These statements were most negative about any suggestion of reports exaggerating findings and denied any personal interest in sensationalism or want to dwell on the invasion of people's private lives. Each factor will be looked at in detail in following chapters.
Further printouts for each factor labeled "items on which type ••• Z's are greater than all other typal Z's" are useful for intrafactor analysis.
For example, type one which has 19 variables (respondents) has only five strong positive items. This suggests that the respondents are tightly clustered in their views, that they are therefore extremely like-minded on these matters and that they are somewhat insular.
To facilitate examination of factors by news selection category, Table 4.3 was extracted independent of the Quanal program. Statements were accorded rankings relative to the strength of the Z-score. The rankings may be negative or positive and the astrisks reflect the salience of the statement for each factor. Three astrisks indicates the most salient.
45 TABLE 4.3 Ranked affinity for selected categories by type STATEMENTS BY CATEGORY FACTORS
(a) SALIENCE 1 2 3
07 * *** ** 09 ** * *** 11 *** * *** 15 ** * *** 37 ** *** * Leading Factor(s) HIGH
(b) MEDIA CONSONANCE 1 2 3
10 *** * ** 12 *** * ** 13 ** * *** 14 * *** ** 16 *** * ** 17 * ** *** 18 ** *** * 20 *** * ** 39 ** *** * 43 * ** *** Leading Factor(s) HIGH HIGH
(c) CREDIBILITY 1 2 3
19 * ** *** 21 *** * ** 22 *** ** * 23 ** *** * 25
Leading Factor(s) HIGH
(d) VOYEURISM 1 2 3
5 *** ** * 24 ** *** * 26 ** *** * 27 * ** *** 28 *** ** * 41 ** *** *
46 Leading Factor(s) HIGH
(e) SENSATIONALISM 1 2 3
03 * *** ** 06 *** * ** 08 * *** ** 29 *** ** * 30 ** *** * 31 *** * -equal- * 32 *** * ** Leading Factor(s) HIGH
(f) REDUNDANT THEMING 1 2 3
02 * *** ** 04 * ** *** 33 *** ** * 34 * *** ** 35 *** ** * 36 ** * *** 38 ** * *** Leading Factor(s) HIGH
(g) NEGATIVISM 1 2 3
01 *** equal * equal *** 40 ** *** * 42 *** ** 44 *** * -equal- *
Leading Factor(s) HIGH
Table 4.4 represents a collation of the data in Table 4.3. It reveals the highest and lowest saliency of categories by factor.
47 TABLE 4.4
Ranked affinity for selected categories by type
FACTOR HIGH SALIENCE LOW SALIENCE
1 Media Consonance Redundant Theming Credibility Sensationalism Negativism
2 Voyeurism Salience Media Consonance Negativism
3 Salience Credibility Media Consonance Voyeurism Redundant Theming Sensationalism
Type One was least concerned with the "redundant theming" category and respondents within this factor disagreed with the concept of the media holding the role of showing justice being done. The most salient categories were media consonance, credibility, sensationalism and negativism. Each of these categories come from commonly acknowledged areas of interest in news media analysis. These categories represent journalism areas which are frequently criticized. Attacks on the journalism profession have often criticized insular reporters who fail to do adequate research on stories and instead rely on negative angles which tend to sensationalize stories. From Table 4.3 it can be seen that the category of negativism is of far greater concern to type one
(proportionally) than any other factor's interest in any category. It would seem that Type One finds this a most salient issue.
48 Type Two seems to find voyeurism its most salient concern. Voyeurism looked at intent to strive for the most colourful or titillating aspects of stories. Of least concern are salience, media consonance and negativism. The placement of negativism as holding low salience whilst voyeurism has high salience is odd at first glance. However, examination of statements in the negativism category suggests more clinical aspects which would require comprehension of facts from reports, whereas voyeurism statements are more generalized and regard reporting style.
Type three balances three high and three low salient categories. Redundant theming, media consonance and salience feature as the high salient areas.
It could be suggested that salience and redundant theming were the more distant or objective categories. Media consonance statements covered the way journalists think about themselves and would be subjective or objective depending on the respondent. The low salient areas were credibility, voyeurism and sensationalism. Each of these are the more subjective or emotive areas found in criticisms of journalism.
49 CHAPTER FIVE
Factor One - "The Fervent Crusader"
Analysis
Nineteen people were clustered on Factor One. The group consisted of 12 journalists (80% of all journalists), four students (25% of all students) and three opinion leaders (18% of all opinion leaders). Items that distinguish factor one with positive discriminations are; 10, 12, 01, 13,
35, 41, 11, 42 and 33.
As discussed in Chapter Four, these statements offer strong support for vigilant journalism. The six strong negative statements are; 22, 30, 05,
06, 29 and 26. They disagree with opinion statements which suggest reports exaggerate findings and opinions promoting personal interest in sensationalism or voyeurism. Table 5.1 provides significant positive and negative item descriptions and z-scores.
The positive items appear to fall into five categories: media consonance; negativism; redundant theming; voyeurism; and salience. The negative items are in three categories: credibility; sensationalism; and voyeurism. It is noted that the statements with the highest negative Z-scores (#29 and
#26) were regarding the issue of voyeurism and sensationalism from a
"self-review-point". 1
1 The term "self-review-point" has been coined to indicate what the respondent thinks about the way he or she personally behaves e.g. #26 - I usually only pay any real attention to stories on the Fitzgerald Inquiry if it relates to aspects of someone's private life, expects the respondent to indicate how he/she would think, while #22 - Journalists can easily be fooled by their sources expects the respondent to indicate how he/she believes journalists would think. The explanation is necessary since all responses are self-referent.
50 TABLE 5.1
Significant item descriptions and descending array of Z-scores for Type One (criterion of significance is 1.000)
Item Description Z-Score
10. The media are primarily responsible 2.565 for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland.
12. It has only been the media's persistent 1. 515 statement that the inquiry into corruption be public that has kept the Fitzgerald Inquiry from being behind closed doors.
1. Media reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry 1. 485 are more likely to show the damaging side of police life rather than talk of the benefits which are resulting.
13. The media are the only effective 1.297 watchdogs on corruption in Queensland.
35. Most people in Queensland want to 1. 215 be kept up-to-date about the Fitzgerald Inquiry by the media on a daily basis.
41. Journalists prefer writing 1.182 controversial rather than non-controversial stories.
11. Journalists will, "in the public 1.149 interest", report matters from the Fitzgerald Inquiry each day, regardless of real public interests.
42. Reports in the media would lead the 1.108 public to believe that most Queensland police officers want the Inquiry to get rid of corrupt police.
33. Unless the media continue to report 1.090 the Fitzgerald Inquiry, corruption within the police force will increase.
22. Journalists can easily be fooled - 1. 264 by their sources.
51 30. I am more interested to hear - 1.411 controversy about the Fitzgerald Inquiry than the actual evidence.
5. Journalists are more interested in - 1. 457 getting good colourful quotes than in portraying an accurate picture of a story.
6. The media are guilty of exaggerating - 1. 588 the findings of the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
29. I only pay attention to reports on - 1. 616 the Fitzgerald Inquiry if the media sensationalize it.
26. I usually only pay any real attention - 1. 709 to stories on the Fitzgerald Inquiry if it relates to aspects of someone's private life.
Beyond this they rebut the concept that the media are guilty of exaggerating testimony, along with suggestions that journalists are more interested in colourful quotes than getting an accurate picture, that journalists could easily be fooled by their sources and, that from the
"self-review-point", deny any preoccupation with controversy.
Item #10, "The media are primarily responsible for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland", with a Z-score of 2.565, is a statistically strong leader in agreement within the group. The statement was in the media consonance category and suggests that Type One holds a strong conviction that the media pushed the government to instigate the
Fitzgerald Inquiry. This is endorsed by a strong Z-score in statement #
12 (1.515), "It has only been the media's persistent statement that the inquiry into corruption be public that has kept the Fitzgerald
Inquiry from being behind closed doors" and by# 13 (1.297), "The media are the only effective watchdogs on corruption in Queensland" and
52 with a weaker Z-score (1.090) # 33,"Unless the media continue to report
the Fitzgerald Inquiry, corruption within the police force will increase.
Further strong positive items (01, 35, 11, 42) provide beliefs that the
public needs (11) as well as wants (35) to be comprehensively informed
about the inquiry, and that even though the police force will face
damaging coverage (01) most police would see this as a cleansing process
(42). Statement # 41 (1.182), "Journalists prefer writing controversial
rather than non-controversial stories", is the only positive item from the voyeurism category and provides a distinction between an occupational
(reporting) style, a likely result of media consonance, and accuracy (05).
A sense of what is right is shown by two statements (06, 26).
Items Most Significant to Factor One
To construct a pattern of beliefs of this "Fervent Crusader", statements
(13, 4, 14, 12, 11, 18, 28, 19, 24, 22, 5) were identified as items with
Z-scores greater and less than all other typal Z-scores. Developing an
image of opinion agreement with Type One would involve the following
components:
1. Acceptance of the concept that the media are the only effective
watchdog;
2. The media are alert and can hunt out corruption;
3. Journalists' research techniques are thorough;
4. The media have a responsibility to make the public aware of issues
through repeated offenses upon sluggish bureaucracies;
5. Journalists are professionals who use credible sources and do not chase
voyeuristic angles.
53 There is no dispute within type one over their uniform concepts of the professional standing and responsibilities of the media. Essentially the media have been placed on a pedestal where they apparently act as an all seeing public watchdog.
Discussion
Type One appears to support Bernard Cohen's contention that the media may not tell people what to think, but do tell people what to think about.
There is a strong contention shown in Type One to support Lowery and de
Fleur's scenario: the media emphasize a particular topic to the stage when the public comes to believe the issue to be truly important. After this politicians decide to take action in the appropriate direction of public concern.
There is a very strong belief of the existence of a mandate to crusade.
When it is recalled that the 63% of respondents in this type were journalists (80% of all journalists), the concurrence on the crusading view within the group, typified by the high Z-score of statement #10, lends strong support to the concept of media consonance. Of the remaining
37%, media students accounted for 21% (25% of all students) and opinion leaders represented 16% (19% of all opinion leaders).
The group is typified by this resolution to the concept that the media stands fast against an adversary. Should the media's apparent hold be lost through a lessening of reports, corruption would return. This suggests a distrust of other parties in the fight against corruption. The comparatively high number of "self-review-point's" in the negative correlations gives an almost puritanical aspect to the type. Coupled with
54 the positive correlations regarding a strong, apparently unified, media set to rid the state of corruption, the imagery of three musketeers shouting "all for one, and one for all" is difficult to shed. There seems
little doubt that this type represents a fervent crusade against corruption and uses journalism as its weaponry. Further analysis may well
indicate, as in many crusades throughout history, the leaders of the
"enemy" are never seen. To support this is the surprising lack of a significant low negative Z-score for statement# 34 (- 0.739), "The net result of the media's coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry is a 'media trial' of some scapegoats while they let the big fish go free". The score may not be so low as to indicate a total lack of consensus, but indicates a point at which a "no-man's land" exists, where the media cannot venture.
55 CHAPTER SIX
Factor Two - "The Journophobic"
Analysis
Seventeen people were clustered on Factor Two. The group consisted of one journalist (6.7% of all journalists), six students (37.5% of all students) and 10 opinion leaders (63% of all opinion leaders}, Items that help distinguish factor two with positive discriminations are 41, 24, 40, 10,
5, 7, 25, 18. These statements offer strong admonishment of journalistic practices. Areas which may typify a voyeuristic reporter are agreed upon by Type Two. Table 6.1 provides significant positive and negative item descriptions and Z-scores.
TABLE 6.1
Significant item descriptions and descending array of Z-scores for Type Two (criterion of significance is 1.000)
Item Description Z-Score
41. Journalists prefer writing 2.419 controversial rather than non controversial stories.
24. More often than not, the media are 1. 616 only interested in people to exploit them for the benefit of a story.
40. Journalists like reports on the 1. 592 Fitzgerald Inquiry because of the frequency of embarrassing stories that the Inquiry generates.
10. The media are primarily responsible 1.306 for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland.
5. Journalists are more interested in 1. 272 getting good colourful quotes than in portraying an accurate picture of a story.
56 7. If the Fitzgerald Inquiry stopped 1. 264 getting startling new testimony, then media coverage would fizzle, regardless of the scope of criminal activity.
25. People in professional areas say that 1.164 a journalist's accuracy drops with the complexity of a story.
18. Journalists are always flying kites on 1.093 news stories in an attempt to get controversial statements.
34. The net result of the media's coverage - 1.151 of the Fitzgerald Inquiry is a "media trial" of some scapegoats while they let the big fish go free.
37. A common belief is that the Fitzgerald - 1.178 Inquiry is of little interest to most people in Queensland.
29. I only pay attention to reports on the - 1. 502 Fitzgerald Inquiry if the media sensationalize it.
14. Journalists are invariably sure of - 1.573 their research before they break a story.
26. I usually only pay any real attention - 1. 799 to stories on the Fitzgerald Inquiry if it relates to aspects of someone's private life.
30. I am more interested to hear controversy - 2.001 about the Fitzgerald Inquiry than the actual evidence.
The positive items fall into five categories: voyeurism; negativism; media consonance; salience; and credibility. Strong negative items include 30,
26, 14, 29, 37, 34. The negative items are also in five categories: sensationalism, voyeurism, media consonance, salience, and redundant theming. It is noted that the statements with the highest negative correlations (#30 and #26) were regarding the issue of voyeurism and sensationalism from a "self-review-point". They disbelieve the certainty
57 of journalists' research and contend that while the inquiry is of substantial interest to the public, the "bigger" corrupt figures will go free in the face of a media trial of scapegoats.
Item #41, "Journalists prefer writing controversial rather than non-controversial stories", is the most significant discrimination within
Type Two with a Z-score of 2.419 (a very high score). The statement was developed within the voyeurism category and suggests that the type holds a strong conviction that journalists use controversial as at least one basis for news selection. It is interesting to note that this statement is generic and need not apply to the Fitzgerald Inquiry. This could be seen as a somewhat anti-journalist sentiment and is confirmed by strong
Z-scores in statements:
# 24 ( 1. 616), "More often than not, the media are only interested in people to exploit them for the benefit of a story";
# 40 ( 1. 592), "Journalists like reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry because of the frequency of embarrassing stories that the Inquiry generates";
# 5 (1.272), "Journalists are more interested in getting good colourful quotes than in portraying an accurate picture of a story";
# 7 (1.264), "If the Fitzgerald Inquiry stopped getting startling new testimony, then media coverage would fizzle, regardless of the scope of criminal activity";
# 25 (1.164), "People in professional areas say that a journalist's accuracy drops with the complexity of a story"; and
# 18 (1.093), "Journalists are always flying kites on news stories in an attempt to get controversial statements".
58 The only strong positive Z-score which could be seen as in some way pro-journalist was for item # 10 (1.306), "The media are primarily responsible for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland". It could also be interpreted that the type saw the media as being destructive in almost bringing a government to its knees. However, Type Two seems to support the inquiry
(#34}. Type Two respondents seem to confirm a belief that the media trail blazed the path to the inquiry. It is interesting to note that the one journalist in this category is a media commentator who adjudicates public opinion rather than editorializes.
Items Most Significant to Factor Two
Items with Z-scores greater and less than all other typal Z-scores were used to develop a model of opinion agreement within Type Two. Belief patterns were strongest in 16 statements (24, 5, 40, 16, 7, 41, 18, 22, 25, 28, 10, 34, 14,
27, 42, 11). The "Journophobic" appears to have a large number of strong opinions about this issue. A description of the group's belief patterns can be drawn from the following extractions:
1. The media are like a pack of hounds;
2. The media exploit people;
3. The media relish embarrassing stories and pref er colourful quotes to accuracy;
4. The media feed on controversy;
5. Their weakness in professional standing is exemplified by poor research, an inability to be accurate on complex issues and a preoccupation for voyeuristic stories;
6. It is doubtful that the media will truly report matters in the "public interest" if the public aren't interested;
7. The media should however, continue to push for sackings;
8. It is unlikely that the coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry is a media trial;
9. The media may not be primarily responsible for the inquiry.
59 Essentially this reveals what could be seen as a paradox in that Type Two respondents greatly distrust the media, yet accept their usefulness to the inquiry process. However, more likely, they acknowledge that there are more constraints placed on the methods available to report the Fitzgerald
Inquiry than on more mundane stories.
Discussion
Type Two appears preoccupied with three complementary categories; voyeurism, sensationalism and negativism. They acknowledge in statement #
10 that the media were responsible for the inquiry but negate this with a clear series of statements with high Z-scores indicating contempt for the reporting methods used by journalists. Coupled with statement # 34, the type suggests that the media will not push deep or hard enough to ensure that "big" offenders are brought to justice. While statement #10 could initially be dismissed as an aberration, several concepts need to be addressed.
Firstly, the media made a point of restating at various times that
Queensland Newspapers' reporter Phil Dickie was instrumental, along with
Four Corners' reporter Chris Masters, in bringing the facts to the surf ace. There is no doubt concerning at least the coincidence between the reports made by Four Corners and The Courier-Mail and the announcement of an inquiry by the Acting Premier of Queensland, the Hon. Bill Gunn. The announcement alluded to these reports having precipitated the inquiry.
However, for factor two, the strength of dislike of journalists' tactics, perhaps based on past experience, seemed to have outweighed this "good deed". One explanation could be through the acceptance of the media's
60 crime busting role through some form of persuasion such as
Noelle-Neumann's Spiral of Silence. Certainly a great deal of local discussion was present about the inquiry given its high initial salience in the Brisbane community. When Gordon Allport and Leo Postman examined rumour, they suggested that:
" ... the more people involved in a serial report, the greater the change is likely to be, until the rumour has reached an aphoristic brevity, and is repeated by rote" (Allport, Postman, 1970, p.154).
Regardless of the fact that it was acknowledged by numerous journalists that much of what was initially disclosed at the inquiry was well known
(by rumour) for "years" without a "media war" on corruption, the repetition of reporting the media as an inquiry catalyst along with the confirmation of high level corruption, transforms rumour (or folklore) into "truth".
While this provides one explanation for the existence of statement # 10 in
Type Two, it doesn't provide a rationale for the presence of such strong anti-journalist sentiment. Palmgreen pointed to local coverage of issues stimulating interpersonal discussion, with a consequential increase in knowledge. Accepting this, given the length of the inquiry, continued acceptance of statement # 10 (if it is continuous) while disagreeing with the media's methods have placed the group in a state of cognitive dissonance. This appears to be the case since the type has found conflict between a negative evaluation of the source and a positive evaluation of the source's position. However, as already discussed, it is possible that item #10 was seen as anti-journalist as well.
61 As discussed in Chapter Two, the concept of cognitive dissonance is a recognition of a state of psychological tension which motivates efforts to restore cognitions to a constant state. Since the impact of the dissonance would depend on the magnitude of discrepancy from the individual's preferred state, this state of flux will presumably seek some point of balance dependent on the saliency of past, present and future experiences with the media. Since most in this group are opinion leaders, they are likely to have dealings with the media on a fairly regular basis. The type of outcome which results is likely to have a bearing on this state of flux.
The high degree of skepticism revealed by this type could be explained by the high proportion of opinion leaders. As opinion leaders it is likely that issues which have the highest salience to themselves are less salient to reporters. Certainly reporters who operate on a "round" may, but generally their occuption necessitates a wider spread of interests. If the opinion leader perceives inaccurate, sensationalized, biased or under-researched stories then over time, a subjective, skeptical image of all journalists may result. This image may itself be inaccurate, sensationalized, biased and under-researched.
Whether this be the case or not, opinion leaders are likely to understand that others in similar opinion leading roles usually hold more information than the journalist. As such, it is probable that this type consider the Fitzgerald
Inquiry to be much bigger than the messengers who report it.
As already discussed, type two is anti-journalist and has been named
"journophobic". Like many holders of phobias, the type appears to have an extraordinary fear of the hazards of (in this case) journalism, yet the group reluctantly accepts that there are occasional benefits.
62 CHAPTER SEVEN
Factor Three - "The Rational Observer"
Analysis
Eleven people were clustered on factor three. The group consisted of two journalists (13% of all journalists), six students (37.5% of all students) and three opinion leaders (19% of all opinion leaders). Items that help distinguish factor three with positive discriminations are 10, 9, 19, 1,
27, 15, 11, 41, and 38. The statements could be seen as more analytical than emotive. At the same time they are critical of the media. Table 7.1 provides significant positive and negative item descriptions and z-scores.
The positive items appear to fall into six of the seven categories; media consonance, salience, credibility, negativism, voyeurism, and redundant theming. Significant negative items include; 13, 4, 6, 3, 14, 36. Three categories exist here; media consonance, redundant theming and sensationalism. It is noted that no "self-review-points" have been found within the statements carrying significant correlations. What initially appears to be an anomaly is that the statement with the highest and particularly strong negative Z-score for #13 appears to work against the statement with the highest positive Z-score for # 10. Both are from the media consonance category. Certainly it is possible to be responsible for the inquiry without being the only effective watchdog, but the strength of the distinction (#10 is 2.191, #13 is 2.391) suggests a strong lack of certainty about the media's abilities in this area.
63 TABLE 7.1
Significant item descriptions and descending array of Z-scores for Type Two (criterion of significance is 1.000)
Item Description Z-Score
10. The media are primarily responsible 2.191 for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland.
9. Brisbane criminal activity covered in 1. 972 the Fitzgerald Inquiry is more likely to be reported in Queensland's largest newspaper than accounts of criminal activity outside the Brisbane area.
19. A lack of in-depth stories in the 1.601 media is a reason why the public ranks journalists low in professionalism.
1. Media reports on the Fitzgerald 1. 502 Inquiry are more likely to show the damaging side of police life rather than talk of the benefits which are resulting.
27. The media should be less strident 1.392 in calls for apparently corrupt officials to be sacked before the Inquiry is completed.
15. The media usually report an account 1.205 of criminal activity addressed in the Fitzgerald Inquiry if the activity is on a larger or more bizarre scale that that reported previously.
11. Journalists will, "in the public 1.104 interest", report matters from the Fitzgerald Inquiry each day, regardless of real public interests.
41. Journalists prefer writing controversial 1.029 rather than non-controversial stories.
38. People cannot keep up-to-date on the 1.026 Fitzgerald Inquiry by monitoring the electronic media alone.
36. It is not possible to understand the - 1. 017 process of the Fitzgerald Inquiry without monitoring the news each working day.
64 14. Journalists are invariably sure of - 1. 223 their research before they break a story.
3. Most people find it offensive that - 1. 297 the media reports hearsay concerning the intimate details of private lives of officials mentioned in the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
6. The media are guilty of exaggerating - 1.321 the findings of the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
4. If there is corruption within the - 1. 770 Queensland Police, the media usually sniff it out and report it.
13. The media are the only effective - 2.391 watchdogs on corruption in Queensland.
Despite the heterogeneous nature of type three persons, 15 significant
Z-scores were identified. The type, as already mentioned is critical of the media yet seems more analytical than emotive. Within the positive groupings, statements are pragmatic. In regard to salience, the placement of statement # 9 (1.972) suggests an understanding of the media's parochial orientation while # 15 (1.205) notes the propensity for bizarre aspects to be readily reported and# 11 (1.104) observes that journalists see a "duty" to report.
The type acknowledges the likelihood of of damaging reports about police life (# 1, 1.502) and suggests that the media should be less attentive to calls for officials to be prematurely sacked. In regard to the manner of reporting, # 41 (1.029) points to the media's preference for controversial stories, # 38 (1.026) indicates doubt of the comprehensiveness of the electronic media and # 19 ( 1. 601) reasons that jou'rnalists' lack of depth in their stories shows a lack of professionalism.
65 This concern for lack of depth is supported by# 14 (- 1.223) and# 4 (-
1.770) which also points to disbelief of continued zeal by journalists.
There is a strong indication that Type Three has a higher opinion of the inquiry team than of the media. This is shown by # 13 (-2.391) which doubts the media are the only "effective watchdogs". Further clarification is shown by # 6 (- 1.321) which denies "the media are guilty of exaggerating the findings of the Fitzgerald Inquiry" and# 3 (- 1.297) which doubts that people would find hearsay reports concerning the intimate details of private lives of officials to be offensive.
Items Most Significant to Factor Three
Items with Z-scores greater and less than all other typal z-scores were used to develop a model of opinion agreement within Type Three. Belief patterns were strongest in 11 statements (27, 34, 19, 9 17, 43, 36, 40,
33, 4, 13). An image of the type could be drawn from the following synthesis of these statements: the media cannot approach stories with adequate depth and should be less keen to push for immediate sackings or it is likely to result in a "media trial" where future cases may be prejudiced; all journalists think alike but have little idea on what the public is concerned with; the media are not the only effective watchdogs and often fail; people can understand the inquiry without continued monitoring and corruption would not necessarily increase as a consequence of the media ceasing reports.
One statement that requires further investigation is # 40, "Journalists like reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry because of the frequency of embarrassing stories that the Inquiry generates". This was given least agreement by Type Three. It does not sit with the concept of the media
66 pushing for further sackings but could be seen as a judgment of what Type
Three sees as embarrassing. Or, Type Three's respect for the inquiry's need to be made public outweighs any question of such stories being published, since they are embarrassing only to the people in areas which deserve attention. The latter seems more likely. One further area to consider is a possible ambiquity in which journalists could be thought of as readers or writers.
Discussion
Type Three places great faith in the workings of the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
It has pointed to the need for daily media coverage and doubts the adequacy of the electronic media to cover the complexity of the inquiry.
However, despite this acceptance of the media's role, there are strong reservations regarding the media's competency to provide well researched and balanced reports.
While this criticism is undeniably present in type three, it is not emotive and there seems to be a clinical distancing by this group from the media. This suggests their analysis may not have been backed up with any great amount of personal experience with the media. The type appears to rationalize the media's place (function) in the inquiry. There is no true personal involvement, shown by the absence of "self-review-points". They seem to place themselves in the role of observers. This is highlighted when # 23 (0.106) is taken into account; "Most people believe that the
Fitzgerald Inquiry team consistently control what the media report".
Although initially this may appear to conflict with views expressed by
Type Three over their certainty of the inquiry's power over the media, it
67 is noted that the low score of # 23 refers to Type Three's opinion of what most people (not themselves) believe.
Looking back at Lane and Sears' discussions on rationality one could assume that the inquiry held little salience for the type (as salience increases so too does irrational opinion). However type three seemed well aware of the issue (given the three positive correlation salience categories). When the concept of an individual's frame of reference is also included (e.g. an expectation of strange and improbable events) it is likely that their attitudes were prescribed to look analytically at the media and to respect (or accept without question) the legal system. So this frame of reference could well be more academic than being personally involved. Type Three can be typified as the "Rational Observer", meaning the uninvolved and dispassionate.
68 CHAPTER EIGHT
Differences Between Types
Type One and Type Two
The types have distinctly different views on media coverage. Table 8.1 reveals a huge void between types one and two, with strong agreement on any opinion in the Q sort almost impossible. The main concern is a question of propriety and the distinctions are strong. The chief differences, with Z-scores greater than 2.000, concern the question of what could be seen as a "fictionalizing" or removal from reality by the media. There are no less than five differences greater than 2.000: # 14, the question of certainty of research; # 11, the certainty of journalists reporting "in the public interest"; # 5, the fixation on colourful quotes; # 24, the question of exploitation; and # 22, the proposition that journalists can easily be fooled by their sources.
Each of these are components of a debate which considers whether what is reported is as accurate as it should be. It also considers the proposition that news reports fall on the path of sensationalism for entertainment's sake. While Type Two was in strong agreement with opinions reflecting an image that journalists are more interested in colourful quotes than accuracy and that their only interest in people is for exploitation, Type
One persons held the opposite view.
69 TABLE 8.1
Item Descriptions and descending array of differences between Types One and Two
Item 1 2 Z-Score
14. Journalists are invariably 0.574 - 1. 573 2.147 sure of their research before they break a story.
11. Journalists will, "in 1.149 - 0.866 2.015 the public interest", report matters from the Fitzgerald Inquiry each day, regardless of real public interests.
4. If there is corruption within 0.742 - 0.897 1.640 the Queensland Police, the media usually sniff it out and report it.
42. Reports in the media would 1.108 - 0.369 1. 477 lead the public to believe that most Queensland police officers want the Inquiry to get rid of corrupt police.
12. It has only been the media's 1.515 0.161 1.354 persistent statement that the inquiry into corruption be public that has kept the Fitzgerald Inquiry from being behind closed doors.
13. The media are the only 1.297 - 0.034 1. 332 effective watchdogs on corruption in Queensland.
39. Journalists have an inherent 0.461 - 0.836 1. 298 understanding of what the public want.
10. The media are primarily 2.565 1.306 1. 259 responsible for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland.
44. The media has shown that the 0.672 - 0.342 1.014 Police Union has effectively protected corrupt police by maintaining Union policies regarding benefits to officers.
70 19. A lack of in-depth stories - 0.423 0.603 - 1.026 in the media is a reason why the public ranks journalists low in professionalism.
41. Journalists prefer writing 1.182 2.419 - 1. 237 controversial rather than non-controversial stories.
7. If the Fitzgerald Inquiry - 0.039 1. 264 - 1.303 stopped getting startling new testimony, then media coverage would fizzle, regardless of the scope of criminal activity. 40. Journalists like reports on 0.273 1. 592 - 1. 318 the Fitzgerald Inquiry because of the frequency of embarrassing stories that the Inquiry generates. 25. People in professional areas - 0.247 1.164 - 1. 412 say that a journalist's accuracy drops with the complexity of a story.
16. Journalists are like a pack - 0.807 0.623 - 1.429 of hounds, all sniffing out the same trail. They consider this to be a virtue. 28. Journalists just pick the - 0.863 0.683 - 1.545 most titillating elements of the Fitzgerald Inquiry for reports to the public. 18. Journalists are always - 0.526 1.093 - 1. 618 flying kites on news stories in an attempt to get controversial statements. 22. Journalists can easily - 1. 264 0.873 - 2.137 be fooled by their sources.
24. More often than not, the - 0.926 1. 616 - 2.541 media are only interested in people to exploit them for the benefit of a story.
5. Journalists are more - 1. 457 1. 272 - 2.728 interested in getting good colourful quotes than in portraying an accurate picture of a story.
71 The closest concurrence of viewpoints while still maintaining strong
Z-scores (greater than 1.000) were on "self-review points":
#30. I am more interested to hear controversy about the Fitzgerald Inquiry than the actual evidence. (difference .590)
#26. I usually only pay any real attention to stories on the Fitzgerald
Inquiry if it relates to aspects of someone's private life. (difference
.089)
#29. I only pay attention to reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry if the media sensationalize it. (difference -.114)
Statement #30 provided the largest difference of the three and indicates
Type Two persons are very strongly opposed (-2.001) to any thought that they personally would be more interested to hear controversy than evidence. Type One are strongly opposed to the same suggestion (-1.411).
The two other statements also reveal a common distaste for forms of voyeurism or sensationalism. However, while they unknowingly agree on their opinions regarding their own likes, reference to Table 8.1 provides vast differences regarding opinions on journalistic practices.
Media consonance (14, 12, 13, 39, 10, 18, 16) is an area of expected disagreement, given that only one journalist was in Type Two. Voyeurism
(5, 24, 28, 41) appears as an area of keen discussion along with credibility (22, 25, 19) and negativism (40, 44, 42).
Type One persons are convinced of their role as crusaders in a world where they are among the few capable of keeping governments honest. Type two all but ignores the question of the inquiry and instead attends, to
72 areas of criticism of journalistic practices. This could be could be seen as falling back on bitter past experiences rather than considering the context of the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
The majority of journalists on Type One, and of opinion leaders on Type
Two must be considered to be a crucial component in opinion formation within these types. Most respondents on each factor have an occupational stake in the media. Journalists work for the media and expressed opinions supporting a role as crusaders through investigative reporting. However, all journalists do not plough the investigative furrow. All journalists in the factors were senior and, in fact, many according to Henningham, (as discussed in Chapter Two) see their role as neutral gates for information flow. Their job is to present all information that is apparent. In essence they package and distribute the information.
On the other hand, the opinion leader would generally be seen as a partisan of a version of that information. Central to such interests would be a desire for accuracy. It is apparent from Table 8.1 that Type Two has a negative opinion of the media's ability to ensure accuracy. Type One holds a different, though not always opposite viewpont. Pragmatic would be the operative word.
Given that Type One does not rebut all claims that the media are infallible, persons within the group could be said to be resigned to the view that journalism is a formidable presence for keeping the world honest while not denying (rather than accepting) that they like the world are not perfect. Persons from Type Two, generally speaking, have the advantage of not needing to def end their own virtues and seem more able to find flaws
73 in the journalistic system. They do not see journalists as having a true role as a pursuer of social justice.
Type One and Type Three
There are strong differences and some similarities between Type One and
Type Three. Media consonance (13, 14), redundant theming (4, 33, 36,34) and credibility (19, 22) categorize most differences between types one and three. Type Three is reasonably convinced of a weakness in journalists' ability to effectively use credible sources. It believes that journalists prefer colourful quotes (voyeurism) while Type One strongly denies this. Clearly the greatest differences are shown through Type
One's confidence of the media as the only effective corruption watchdog, while Type Three denies this. Type three recognises a situation of redundant theming whereby the media is apparently playing out a superficial cleansing of corruption. They are skeptical of the media's ability to truly delve into the web of intrigue that surrounds the corruption issue. The differences, then, are not really over more sanguine issues of voyeurism, sensationalism or negativity. Instead, the suitability of the media as an arbiter in such a complex issue is questioned. Perhaps Type Three is not too distant from Type One on other concerns, but this one seems to cast doubt through uncertainty of the media's access to information. The Fitzgerald Inquiry appears as the sole source of information and this weakens the media's leverage.
74 TABLE 8.2
Item Descriptions and descending array of differences between Types One and Three
Item 1 3 Z-Score
13. The media are the only 1.297 - 2.391 3.688 effective watchdogs on corruption in Queensland.
4. If there is corruption 0.742 - 1.770 2.512 within the Queensland Police, the media usually sniff it out and report it.
14. Journalists are invariably 0.574 - 1.223 1.797 sure of their research before they break a story.
33. Unless the media continue 1.090 - 0.385 1.475 to report the Fitzgerald Inquiry, corruption within the police force will increase.
36. It is not possible to 0.321 - 1.017 1.339 understand the process of the Fitzgerald Inquiry without monitoring the news each working day.
3. Most people find it - 0.272 - 1.297 1.026 offensive that the media reports hearsay concerning the intimate details of private lives of officials mentioned in the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
9. Brisbane criminal activity 0.961 1.972 - 1.011 covered in the Fitzgerald Inquiry is more likely to be reported in Queensland's largest newspaper than accounts of criminal activity outside the Brisbane area.
5. Journalists are more - 1.457 - 0.154 - 1.303 interested in getting good colourful quotes than in portraying an accurate picture of a story.
27. The media should be less - 0.041 1.392 - 1.433 strident in calls for apparently corrupt officials to be sacked before the Inquiry is completed.
75 34. The net result of the - 0.739 0.755 - 1.494 media's coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry is a "media trial" of some scapegoats while they let the big fish go free.
22. Journalists can easily be - 1. 264 0.472 - 1.737 fooled by their sources.
19. A lack of in-depth stories - 0.423 1. 601 - 2. 024 in the media is a reason why the public ranks journalists low in professionalism.
Table 4.1 on page 43 revealed a significant correlation between Type One and Type Three. The respondents on each factor share similar strong
Z-scores on five opinion statements:
#10. The media are primarily responsible for the present inquiry into corruption in Queensland. (Difference .374)
# 41. Journalists prefer writing controversial rather than non-controversial stories. (Difference .154)
# 11. Journalists will, "in the public interest", report matters from the
Fitzgerald Inquiry each day, regardless of real public interests.
(Difference .045)
# 1. Media reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry are more likely to show the damaging side of police life rather than talk of the benefits which are resulting. (Difference -0.017)
# 6. The media are guilty of exaggerating the findings of the Fitzgerald
Inquiry. (Difference -0.268, respondents disagreed with this opinion)
Clearly, respondents agreed on a number of pragmatic areas. These opinions reflect an acceptance of the media's role in the inquiry and assert that controversy is a natural part of journalism as is their function to
"publish and be damned".
76 Strong areas of uncertainty are on# 11 (0.045), on the certainty of
journalists reporting "in the public interest" and# 1 (-0.017), on the media's propensity to report the damaging side of police life. Each of
these accepts the "facts of life" that the media is there as a conduit to
report the inquiry proceedings verbatim.
Type Two and Type Three
Type Three was dubbed "Rational Observer" and reasoned that the media had their place in the inquiry but were essentially followers, rather than
leaders on this issue. The group saw the media's role to play out the
(superficial) public part in the cleansing of corruption. It saw the corruption issue as almost overwhelming and journalism was accepted as an available, if not ideal, means of furthering discussion in the public arena.
Type Two, the "Journophobic", ignored the corruption issue to a large extent, finding the most salient issue to be a distrust of journalists.
The differences between Type Two and Type Three should provide the most clinical debate between emotional and analytical approaches to the issue by news readers. This is likely since Type One was so clearly, numerically represented by the media, one of the involved parties. The points of difference greatly outweigh similarities with the only area of strong agreement being on statement # 14, "Journalists are invariably sure of their research before they break a story".
77 TABLE 8.3
Item Descriptions and descending array of differences between Types Two and Three
Item 2 3 Z-Score
13. The media are the only - 0.034 - 2.391 2.356 effective watchdogs on corruption in Queensland.
24. More often than not, the 1.616 - 0.323 1.938 media are only interested in people to exploit them for the benefit of a story.
40. Journalists like reports on 1.592 - 0.234 1.826 the Fitzgerald Inquiry because of the frequency of embarrassing stories that the Inquiry generates.
5. Journalists are more 1.272 - 0.154 1.426 interested in getting good colourful quotes than in portraying an accurate picture of a story.
41. Journalists prefer writing 2.419 1.029 1.390 controversial rather than non-controversial stories.
7. If the Fitzgerald Inquiry 1.264 - 0.119 1.382 stopped getting startling new testimony, then media coverage would fizzle, regardless of the scope of criminal activity.
16. Journalists are like a pack 0.623 - 0.737 1.360 of hounds, all sniffing out the same trail. They consider this to be a virtue.
33. Unless the media continue 0.776 - 0.385 1.161 to report the Fitzgerald Inquiry, corruption within the police force will increase.
25. People in professional areas 1.164 0.042 1.122 say that a journalist's accuracy drops with the complexity of a story.
43. A journalist's idea of public 0.283 - 0.828 1.110 reaction is measured by phone calls or letters to the editor.
78 18. Journalists are always 1.093 0.084 1.008 flying kites on news stories in an attempt to get controversial statements.
30. I am more interested to - 2.001 - 0.953 - 1.048 hear controversy about the Fitzgerald Inquiry than the actual evidence.
38. People cannot keep up- - 0.055 1. 026 - 1. 082 to-date on the Fitzgerald Inquiry by monitoring the electronic media alone.
23. Most people believe that - 0.993 0.106 - 1.099 the Fitzgerald Inquiry team consistently control what the media report. 42. Reports in the media would - 0.369 o. 776 - 1.144 lead the public to believe that most Queensland police officers want the Inquiry to get rid of corrupt police. 17. Most journalists think - 0.240 o. 941 - 1.181 alike about what they consider to be newsworthy. But this is often different to the what the public thinks.
9. Brisbane criminal activity 0.529 1. 972 - 1. 443 covered in the Fitzgerald Inquiry is more likely to be reported in Queensland's largest newspaper than accounts of criminal activity outside the Brisbane area.
34. The net result of the - 1.151 0.755 - 1.906 media's coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry is a "media trial" of some scapegoats while they let the big fish go free.
11. Journalists will, "in - 0.866 1. 104 - 1. 970 the public interest", report matters from the Fitzgerald Inquiry each day, regardless of real public interests.
27. The media should be less - 0.592 1. 392 - 1. 983 strident in calls for apparently corrupt officials to be sacked before the Inquiry is completed.
79 Where the groups sit on "opposite sides of the fence" involve categories of voyeurism (27, 24, 5), salience (11, 7), negativity (40) and redundant theming (34, 38). The greatest differences are on the issue of the media's function and place. Type Two gives more credence to the idea of a rogue media than Type Three. Each group's focus on the Fitzgerald Inquiry comes from a different direction.
The Consensus Factor
Drawing on information from table 4.2 on page 44, the eight consensus items for all respondents, a question needs to be posed. The overwhelming denial of any interest in sensationalism (30, 29, 6) and voyeurism (26) suggests that none of the resondents represent the commonly viewed commercial audience. It is undeniable that the more profitable newspapers throughout the world offer such categories in their content and are rewarded with large readerships. Further studies of readers without media involvement would prove interesting. On close examination, this ''consensus factor" represents the pure analysis of the Fitzgerald Inquiry issue. This
"factor" states what it considers that ensured the inquiry's implementation, acknowledges the likely reporting style and consequences and certifies its disinterest in sensationalism for its own sake. An extrapolation of this factor's opinions could be:
"I accept that the media are primarily responsible for the inquiry. The media's penchant for writing contoversial stories ensures a propensity to show the damaging side of police life. However they are justified in this case, since the stories are important, even though they are damaging to some. I follow the inquiry, but do so out of a sense of historical importance more than any interest in revelations of sordid controversy."
80 CHAPTER 9
CONCLUSION
Organisation and Justification
This study has been primary in nature. Chapter Two examined areas of mass media research that were deemed useful support to the bulk of the study.
The major part was to perform a Q sort to identify attitudes of selected groups toward media coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry. Q has not be used to study the media to any great extent within Australia and yet it is an ideal method for identifying the very types of opinion discussed each time an academic discusses the media. Comments in any analysis of media coverage, or for that matter even in cinema or fiction often dwells on the feud between source and journalist. The source (often the opinion leader) frequently claims bias, misquotation, or fabrication by the journalist. In turn, journalists could see something sinister behind the opinion leader, some evil intent to manipulate the media for one's own ends.
In the meantime the reader is the innocent bystander, blamed by the serious journalist as the source of demand for sensationalism and by the defensive opinion leader as ill-informed and led by the media. This study used opinion leaders, senior journalists and communication students as respondents. But no attempt was made to select respondents by any statistical sampling method. No more than three journalists came from any one organisation. They were spread throughout print, radio and television and most earned in excess of $45,000 per year, indicating considerable media experience. Opinion leaders were selected from a broad range of areas. Some were from non-profit areas, some from parliament, some from government, some from industry. Salaries ranged from $15,000 to more than
81 $100,000 per year. A class of third year communication students at the
Queensland Institute of Technology was chosen as the reader category.
Interviews with individuals representing each type, along with a review of studies on agenda setting led to the construction of 44 Q statements which could be placed in a number of categories, some from existing works and some hybrids as a result of preliminary investigations. It was anticipated that the results of an identical Q study performed on all kinds (opinion leader etc) should provide a foundation on which to undertake further study into attitudes toward the media. It was not intended to extrapolate the results as a predictor of future behaviour, nor was it intended to suggest that all journalists, opinion leaders and communication students thought in particular ways.
Rationale
For the study to succeed, it would be expected that clear opinion types should fall onto factors which could be described or characterized. It would not necessarily be a success if the types happened to be discrete to their professional leaning. Q was used because of its ability to show similarities, differences or communalities in a quantifiable form. It allows expressions of feelings to be mapped and described, so that the character of types can be recognised. Q measures subjectivity.
The results of this study have been pleasing in the sense that clear types have been identified and explained. An understanding of how these respondents
"group think" is now possible, where it was previously not possible. To have interviewed all people and keep the interviewer on an objective path for future comparison would be unlikely to provide evidence as conclusive.
82 Types of quantitative studies such as surveys would be hamstrung by the writer's initial interpretation of terms without any future reference to alternate interpretations by respondents. The data provided in this study can be used for further analysis at a later date to develop reference points for other studies.
Summary
The 47 respondents fell into three clear factors. Factor One, "The Fervent
Crusader", provides the intrinsic beliefs expected for a fearless reporter. There is a resolution which could be typified as journalists as
"shining white knights" standing with a common purpose in an alien climate. While not criticizing the justice system itself, they see the media as the only real promise of justice being seen to be done. Without continued diligence to the coverage there is a belief that corruption would return. As such, they distrust other parties in the fight against corruption. They are steadfast in the belief that journalistic practices are responsible and effective and disagree with opinions that reporters chase voyeuristic angles or that stories lack solid research. They accept entertainment as an integral part of journalism and neither reject nor support common criticisms. The media consonance concept of common thought discussed in studies on agenda setting clearly exists here.
Type Two, "The Journophobic", is the antithesis of Type One. They
(opinion leaders) are preoccupied with examining the media with stereotypes which can be categorized as voyeurism, sensationalism and negativism. They are myopic, failing to regard other viewpoints. There is undoubted contempt for the reporting methods used by the media. The salience of the issue of journalism itself is high with this type, as it
83 was with Type One. Type Two remains highly skeptical toward journalistic practices.
Type Three, "The Rational Observer", comprises ratiocinators. Even in self-referent tests they remain passive and objective. They appear to be uninvolved and are most able to analyse the situation. However, their judgment is still subjective, still based on experiences that formed the attitudes that now enable judgments to be made. But the salience of the question of journalism is not as great. They have faith in the workings of the Fitzgerald Inquiry and although there are strong reservations regarding the media's competency to provide well researched and balanced reports, the type does accept the media's role while maintaining a
"critics eye".
Discussion
Of keen interest to the emotional types (one and two) was the question of voyeurism and media consonance. Media consonance could be described as the intrinsic belief that journalists have the role of watchdogs for the people against the threat of corruption. Voyeurism was demonstrated by
Type Two through the unshakable belief that journalism is based on poor research with an addiction for hunting the offbeat and often impertinent but irrelevant angle. It was left to type three to examine what has been dubbed redundant theming, the concern for superficial media which cannot, for whatever reason, go sufficiently deep to truly hunt out all guilty parties. If type two was typical of all opinion leaders, and this study does not wholly suggest that, journalism would have a long path to travel in educating interviewees on media conventions.
84 TABLE 9.1 ATTRIBUTE TYPES
TYPE ATTITUDINAL OCCUPATION SUMMARY TYPE
1. emotive/distrustful/ 63% journalist/ Fervent functional/dogmatic/ 16% opinion Crusader sanctimonious/pro- leader/21% journalism/communal student
2. emotive/skeptical/ 5% journalist/ Journophobic media myopic/anti- 59% opinion media/self-centred/ leader/35% self-righteous student
3. objective/rational/ 18% journalist Rational structural/passive/ 27% opinion Observer pro-social control leader/55% student
Table 9.1 illustrates the essential characteristics of each type. While
Factor One and Factor Three persons are closest, it is worth note that
Factor One and Factor Two have similar characteristics. They do not have opinion agreement but the manner in which they consider opinions is close.
They are both emotive, hold rigid ideas, are self-righteous and insular.
These characteristics are from long formed and subliminal attitudes molding the way they approach new situations. Both hold strong fixed methods of justifying adopted roles. It could be suggested that any new situation would be dealt with using the same operating characteristics.
In support of this, three of the opinion leaders in Type Two are former journalists.
85 This could be seen to support the concept of the Spiral of Silence, since opinions can change, dependent on the work environment. However, rather than being seen as some form of weakness, it is a more a meeting of like minds each formulated from prior experiences and conditioning, The clusters revealed in this study are opinion oases, and like an oasis, the numbers of people who camp at any oasis will vary, depending on circumstances that cause them to arrive at this point. The actual reaction to a circumstance will change from one day to the next, depending on the importance and depth of need. But the method or manner in which the individuals react may not change as readily. In essence, it is as simple as a school debate. Given a task, the speaker approaches with an intent to win. And it is this intentionality which Stephenson (1988) points to as fundamental to Q. Factors are intentional, pointing to possible courses of actions.
Conclusion
On a technical level, this study has shown Q Methodology to be a worthwhile path to take in studying journalists' attitudes toward the media and people's attitudes toward the media. The methodology allows for the data to be reviewed by any researcher to pursue new directions. The data is constructed only by the respondents and any interpretation or definitions in this paper have only been developed post data gathering.
It is an accurate record of opinion.
On a self-review basis, a number of areas could be improved for future Q studies. Given that groups with distinctly different professional orientations were present, it would be useful to next look at individual groups and conduct new Q studies. The new studies would carry opinion
86 statements peculiar to each group and would provide greater amounts of information for analysis. Statements chosen for the current study leaned toward traditional areas of belief within media analysis, such as the concept of sensationalism. The lack of importance of this as well as the individual
(personal) rejection of voyeuristic preferences indicates a solid area for future study. The statements provided were useful in looking at each group, but it would be this writer's preference now to look in depth at each category, splitting each into smaller sub-categories for finer analysis.
Nevertheless, the methodology allowed for the clear identification of three distinct groups. It allowed for the recognition of feelings of individuals and the classification of such individuals into types. This follows Stephenson's
(1983, p.82) concept that statements in concourse shift their meanings with their company. While it is not possible to determine a statistical figure or proportion, these types exist in the wider community (120).
The three types present a balance of view that could be represented by a child's see saw. Type Three would act as an agent of balance at the pivot allowing the polarized opinions of Type One and Type Two to vainly seek greater heights. Yet whenever one pursues that greater height, the other will surely force its return. This equilibrium of concerns revealed on each factor would support Walter Lippmann's 1922 assertion:
" •.. the environment with which our public op1n1ons deal is refracted in many ways, by censorship and privacy at the source, by physical and social barriers at the other end, by scanty attention, by poverty of language, by distraction, by unconscious constellations of feeling, by wear and tear, violence, monotony. These limitations upon our access to that environment combine with the obscurity and complexity of the facts themselves to thwart clearness and justice of perception, to substitute misleading fictions for workable ideas, and deprive us of adequate checks upon those who consciously strive to mislead" (Lippmann, 1922, pp.48-49).
87 Attitudes reflected in each factor result from prior and current
experiences. These experiences are subjective and need not be related to
fact. A committed journalist can become a committed opinion leader with
views on the justification of journalistic practices opposing those he or
she once held. This interest which underlies the three types supports
Stephenson's concept that communication theory should concern opinion while fact is the domain of information theory (Stephenson, 1969, p.70).
The heterogeneous nature of Type One provides further support for the concept of media consonance. While the conformity of the journalists may not be surprising, the conformity of the majority opinion leaders (Type
Two) merits attention in future studies. The communication students are
likely to become journalists or opinion leaders (or at least be advisers to opinion leaders). As such their interests may vary over time and currently would be dependent on their aspirations and studies rather than on first hand media experience.
What influences each type seems to be tied to salience of the subjects
(Fitzgerald Inquiry and media methods) rather than knowledge of fact.
Facts do not matter, the use or manipulation of them does, Few deny either the need for, or the effectiveness of the (unfamiliar) legal system. Instead they chose the familiar or most salient viewpoint. This is the crux of Q studies. Each type found sanctuary within familiar, consonant grounds. Essentially this is the enactment of contrived fact.
Opinions and attitudes rest on deeply entrenched beliefs. What is most pertinent for future study results, unintentionally, from the revelation of presumed changes in attitude by former journalists. A 180 degree shift in attitude on journalistic practice demands further study. It shows the
88 belief system to be dynamic and migratory. A form of self-actualization can be seen to be a part of the individual's belief system. Peers are expendable and serve only to attend to a need for consonance. As such, the existence of and not the information within consonance is essential to the survival of the belief system.
What we call fact could be consequence of reality such as the sun appearing in the morning sky, or could be "historically-proven" opinion based on reports carried by media and combined with rumour. "Readers" of and "players" in media coverage of the Fitzgerald Inquiry have developed a view based on these information conditions. An explanation of the result belongs in the domain of communication theory. The use of Q methodology has allowed an XYZ communication interaction to be described by the participants. It has allowed a fresh approach, avoiding other methods of studying the media mentioned in Chapter Two. However, results of these methods have been useful in analysing the factors. The use of categories: salience, media consonance, credibility, negativism, sensationalism, redundant theming and voyeurism enabled a clearer understanding of each factor's opinions, attitudes and beliefs.
Finally, this study has revealed a number of windows to describe some types of "readers" and "players". Further study would be worthwhile within each of the respondent classes, but particularly the journalists and opinion leaders. These studies should look at the attitudes each class has toward its own work place. Each study should investigate what most concerns them and what belief systems they operate from. The studies should also regard what impact outsiders have to their respective interests.
89 APPENDIX I INSTRUCTION SHEET
90 This study is intended to identify how you feel about media reports on the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
It should take about 25 minutes to complete. Any information supplied is understood to be confidential and neither names nor titles are required.
Please look at the inverted pyramid. There are 44 squares. You will need to write one number in each square. Numbers should not be repeated and no square should remain blank. The numbers relate to the 44 statement cards in the envelope.
Read the statements and place the ones you agree with in one pile. Those you disagree with should go in a second pile. There will some that you neither agree nor disagree with, so put these down as the third pile. Do not be concerned if the piles are not even. Now, look through the "agree" pile and choose the two statements you most agree with. Write the numbers of these statements in the two far right squares (Find +5).
Find the next three you agree with the most. Write their numbers in the three +4 squares. Continue filling in the "agree" squares with the one's you most agree with towards the right. Time to go to the left-hand side, now.
Choose the two statements you most disagree with and place these in the far left-hand squares (Find -5). Then pick the next three you most disagree with and write these in the -4 squares. Continue with the "disagree" statements, working from those you most disagree with towards the left.
Next, write the remaining statements which you are less emphatic about in the remaining squares according to your relative agreement or disagreement and then place those that you are most neutral about in the zero (0) squares.
This mandatory structured form may concern you. You may have placed some in the zero squares which you actually agree with, for example. Please do not worry, as it is intended in the research methodology. At any stage you may go back and change the numbers in the squares. However, please ensure that a number is not repeated.
When you have finished, please fill in the background information questionnaire.
Thank you for you assistance.
91 APPENDIX II DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SHEET
92 Background Information
This information is confidential and is not intended to be used to identify respondents.
1. Occupation
[ ) Chief Executive [ ) Senior Management [ ) Middle Management [ ] Professional Staff [ ] Non- Professional Staff [ ] Self-Employed [ ] Unemployed [ ] Student [ ] Other ...... , ......
2. Income
[ ] $100,000 or greater [ ] $75,000 - $99,999 [ ] $50,000 - $74,999 [ ] $35,000 - $49,999 [ ] $25,000 - $34,999 [ ] $15,000 - $24,999 [ ] less than $15,000 [ ] nil
3. Highest Education
[ ] Higher Degree [ ] Degree [ ] Diploma [ ] Some Tertiary [ ] Secondary [ ] Primary
93 APPENDIX I II
Q SORT FORM
94 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 +l +2 +3 +4 +S
2 2
3 3
4 4
s s 5 5
6
95 APPENDIX IV ITEM DESCRIPTIONS
96 ITEM DESCRIPTIONS Tl'PAL Z'S 1 2 3 N'S FOR EACH IYPE ARE 19 17 11
1,MEDIA REPORTS ON THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY ARE MORE LIKELY TO SHO~ 1.5 0,9 1,5 THE DAMAGING SIDE Of POLICE LIFE RATHER THAN TALK OF !HE BENEFITS WHICH ARE RESULTING, 2,REPORTS ON THE FlTZG~RALD INQUIRY ARE BORING, BUT PEOPLE NEED TO -0.4 -o.a -o,o FOLLOW IT TO REMIND-US ALL THAT JUSTICE IS BEING DONE, ),MOST PEOPLE FIND IT WFFENSIVE THAT THE MEDIA REPORTS HEARSAY •0,3 •0,9 •1,3 CONCERNING THE INTIMATE DETAILS OF PRIVATE LIVES OF OFFICIALS MENTIONED IN THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY, 4,IF THERE Is CORRUPTION ~!THIN THE QUEENSLAND POLICE, THE MEDIA o.7 •0,9 -1.s USUALLY SNIFF IT our AND REPORT IT, 5,JOURNALISTS ARE MORE INTERESTED IN GETTING GOOD COLOURFUL QUOTES •1,5 1,3 •0,2 THAN IN PORTRAYING AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF A STORY, 6,THE MEDIA ARE GUILTY OF EXAGGERATING THE FINDINGS OF THE •loo •0,8 •1.3 FITZGERALD INQUIRY, 7,IF THE FITZGERALD INWUIRY STOPPED GETTING STARTLING NEW O.O 1,3 •0,1 TESTIMONY, THEN MEDIA COVERAGE WOULD FIZZLE, REGARDLESS OF !HE SCOPE OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITX, 8,THE MEDIA'S ATTEMPTS -TO SPICE UP THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY ARE •0.2 •0,6 0,3 BORING, AND I AM ONuY INTERESTED IF THE ACCUSED ARE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE, 9,BRISBANE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY COVERED IN THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY IS 1,0 0,5 2,0 MORE LIKELY TO BE R~PORTED IN OUEENSLAND'S LARGEST NEWSPAPER THAN ACCOUNTS Of CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OUTSIDE THE BRISBANE AREA, 10,THE MEDIA ARE PRIMARILY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PRESENT INQUIRY 2,6 1,3 2,2 INTO CORRUPTION IN UUEENSLAND, 11,JDURNALISTS WILL, "IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST", REPORT MATTERS FROM 1.1 •0,9 1.1 THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY EACH DAY, REGARDLESS or REAL PUBLIC INTERESTS. 12.IT HAS ONLY BEEN THE-MEDIA'S PERSISTENT STATEMENT THAT THE 1.s 0.2 O,o INQUIRY INTO CORRUPTION BE PUBLIC THAT HAS KEPT THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY FROM BEING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, 13,THE MEDIA ARE THE ONuY EFFECTIVE WATCHDOGS ON CORRUPTION IN 1.3 0,0 •2,4 QUEENSLAND, 14,JOURNALISTS ARE INVARIABLY SURE OF THEIR RESEARCH BEFORE THEY 0.6 •1,6 •1.2 BREAK A STORY, - 15,THE MEDIA USUALLY REPORT AN ACCOUNT OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY 0.6 0,4 1,2 ADDRESSED IN THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY IF THE ACTIVITY IS ON A LARGER OR MORE BIZARRE SCALE THAN THAT REPORTED pREVIOUSLY, 16,JOURNALISTS ARE LIKE A PACK OF HOUNDS, ALL SNIFFING our THE -o.s 0,6 -o,7 SAME TRAIL, THEY CONSIDER THIS TO BE A VIRTUE, 17,MOST JOURNALISTS THINK ALIKE ABOUT WHAT THEY CONSIDER TO BE 0,1 •0,2 0,9 NEWSWORTHY, BUT THIS IS OFTEN DIFFERENT TO THE WHAT THE PU8LIC THINKS, 18,JOURNALISTS ARE ALWAYS FLYING KITES ON NEWS STORIES IN AN •0,5 1,1 0,1 ATTEMPT TO GET CONT~OVERSIAL STATEMENTS, 19,A LACK OF IN-DEPTH SiORIES IN THE MEDIA IS A REASON WHY THE •0,4 0,6 1,o PUBLIC RANKS JOURNA~ISTS LOW IN PROFESSIONALISM, 20,UNLESS A STORY ON TH~ FITZGERALD INQUIRY IS HEADLINED IN A RADIO •0,8 •0,3 •O,o OR TELEVISION BULLETIN, OR IS IN THE FIRST THREE PAGES OF A NE~SPAPER, IT WON'T BE WORTH R~ADING,
97 rYPAL Z'S
21,NEWS PRODUCERS HAVE BEEN TRICKED INTO REPORTING NEGATIVE ~AT!ERS •0.7 •0.1 •0,5 SURROUNDING THE PROCESS Of THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY WITHOUT ADEQUATELY RESEARCHING THE MATiER, 22,JOURNALISTS CAN EASILY BE FOOLED BY THEIR SOURCES, o.s 23,MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY TEAM 0,1 CONSISTENTLY CONTROL WHAT THE MEDIA REpORT, 24,MORE OFTEN THAT NOT, THE MEDIA ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN PEOPLE TO -0.9 1,6 -o,J EXPLOIT THEM FDR TH~ BENEFIT OF A STORY, 25,PEOPLE IN pROfESSlONAL AREAS SAY THAT A JOURNALIST'S ACCURACY -0.2 o.o DROPS WITH THE COMPLEXITY OF A STORY, 26,I USUALLY ONLY PAY ANY REAL ATTENTION To STORIES ON THE -1.7 •1.8 -1.0 FITZGERALD INQUIRY iF IT RELATES TO ASPECTS OF SOMEONE'S PRIVATE LifE. 27,THE MEDIA SHOULD BE LESS STRIDENT IN CALLS FOR APPARENTLY o.o -o,6 1,4 CORRUPT OFFICIALS TO BE SACKED BEFORE THE INQUIRY IS COMPLETED, 28,JOURNALISTS JUST PICK THE MOST TITILLATING ELEMENTS OF THE -o.9 0,7 -0,2 FITZGERALD INQUIRY FOR REPORTS TO THE pUBLIC, 29 1 1 ONLY PAY ATTENTION-TO REPORTS ON THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY IF THE -1.6 -1,s -o.9 MEDIA SENsATIONALIZ~ IT, 30,I AM MORE INTERESTED-TO HEAR CONTROVERSY ABOUT THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY THAN THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE, 31,IT IS ALWAYS GOOD TO-HEAR FITZGERALD REPRIMAND PARTIES OUTSIDE 0,3 -0.1 -0,1 THE INQUIRY BECAUSE IT SHOWS THE PUBLIC SPIRIT OF THE INOUIRY, 32,REPORTERS TRY TD MAKE STARS OF THEMSELVES BY EXPLOITI~G THE -1.0 -0.1 •0,6 FITZGERALD INQUIRY, 33,UNLESS THE MEDIA CONTINUE TD REPORT THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY, 1. 1 0,0 -o,4 CORRUPTION WITHIN THE POLICE FORCE WILL INCREASE, 34,THE NET RESULT OF TH~ MEDIA'S COVERAGE or THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY -o.7 -1.2 0,8 IS A •MEDIA TRIAL" ~F SOME SCAPEGOATS wHILE THEY LET THE BIG FISH GO FREE, 35,MOST PEOPLE IN QUEENSLAND wANT TO BE KEPT Up•TO•DATE ABOUT THE 1.2 0.1 o.s FITZGERALD INQUIRY ~y THE MEDIA ON A DAILY BASIS, 36,IT IS NOT pOSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS OF THE FifZGERALD 0,3 -0.1 -1.0 INQUIRY WITHOUT MQNlTORING THE NEWS EACH WORKING DAY, 37,A COMMON BELIEF IS THAT THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY IS OF LITTLE -o.9 -1.2 -o,s INTEREST TD MOST PEUPLE IN QUEENSLAND, 38,PEOPLE CANNOT KEEP UP•TO•DATE ON THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY BY o.s -0,1 1.0 MONITORING THE ELECiRONIC MEDIA ALONE, 39,JOURNALISTS HAVE AN lNHERENT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE PUBLIC o.s •0,8 -0.2 WANT, .. 40,JOURNALISTS LIKE REPORTS ON THE FITZGERALD INQUIRY BECAUSE OF 0,3 THE FREQUENCY Of EMBARRASSING STORIES THAT THE INQUIRY GENERATES, 41,JOURNALISTS PREFER WHITING CONTROVERSIAL RATHER THAN 1.2 1.0 NON-CONTROVERSIAL stORIES, 42,REPORTS IN THE MEDIA-WOULD LEAD THE PUBLIC TO BELIEVE !HAT MOST 1.1 •0,4 0,8 QUEENSLAND POLICE OfFICERS WANT THE INQUIRY TO GET RID or CORRUPT POLICE, - 43,A JOURNALIST'S IDEA UF PUBLIC REACTION IS MEASURED BY PHONE 0.1 0,3 -o.s CALLS OR LETTERS TO THE EDITOR,
98 ITEM DESCRIPTIONS rrPAL z•s
44,THE MEDIA HAS SHOWN THAT THE POLICE UNION HAS EFFECTIVELY 0.1 -0,3 o.3 PROTECTED CORRUPT POLICE BY ~AINTAINING UNION PO~ICIES REGARDING BENEFITS TD 0ff 1CER~,
99 REFERENCES
Altheide, D. L. (1982). Three-in-one news: Network coverage of Iran. Journalism Quarterly. 59 482-486.
Bohle, R. H. (1986). Negativism as news selection predictor. Journalism Quarterly, 63 789-796. Brown, s. R., & Brenner, D. (1972). Science, psychology, and communication, New York: Teachers College Press. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson.
Fiske, J. (1983). Key concepts in communication. Sydney: Methuen.
Freedman, J, L. (1971). Readings in social psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Gadir, S. (1982). The mass media and agenda-setting effects - A view from Australia. Australian Journal of Communication. No's 1 & 2 Jan. - Dec. Brisbane: Communication Institute.
Gandy O. H. Jr. (1982) Beyond agenda setting:Information subsidies and public policy. Norwood: Ablex.
Goffman, E. (1971) Relations in public. New York: Basic Books.
Henningham, J. (1982) Television journalists: Participant and neutral values. Australian Journal of Communication. No's 1 & 2 Jan. - Dec. Communication Institute: Brisbane.
Henningham, J. (1988) Looking at television news. Melbourne: Longman Chesire.
Hofstetter, R. C.,& Dozier, D. M. (1986). Useful news, sensational news: Quality, sensationalism and local TV news. Journalism Quarterly. 63 815-820.
Karmatz, F.N. (1985). Teenage attitudes towards the mass media. Australian Journalism Review. 1· No's 1&2 January/December.
Karmatz, F.N., (1974). A two-level Q Methodological study of the attitudes of pre-journalism students toward business and business-related press. Dissertation, University of Missouri.
100 Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt.
Lane, R. E. & Sears, D. O. (1964) Public opinion. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1960). Mass communication, popular taste and organized action. In Mass Communication. W. Schramm (Ed.) Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Lemert, J, B., (1974). Content duplication by the networks in competing evening newscasts. Journalism Quarterly. 51238-244. Lowery, s., & De Fleur, M. (1983) Milestones in mass communication research: Media effects. New York: Longman. Maddi, s. R., (1972) Personality theories: A comparartive analysis. Homewood: Dorsey Press.
Norton, W. Jr., Windhauser, J. W., & Boone, A. (1985) Agreement between reporters and editors in Mississippi. Journalism Quarterly. 62 633-635.
Riffe, D., Ellis, B., Rogers, M.K., Van Ommeren R. L., & Woodman, K. A. (1986). Gatekeeping and the network news mix. Journalism Quarterly. 63 315-321.
Rogers, E. M., & Kincaid, D. L. (1980). Communication networks. New York: Free Press.
Rosengren, K. E., Wenner L.A., & Palmgreen, P., (1985). Media gratifications research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Schramm, W., (1970). The process and effects of communication. Chicago: University of Illinois.
Stempel, G. H. III. (1985). Gatekeeping: The mix of topics and the selection of stories. Journalism Quarterly. 62 791-796.
Stephenson, W. (1983). Against interpretation. Operant Subjectivity. S. R. Brown (Ed.) April/July. Ohio: Kent State.
Stephenson, W. (1969). Foundations of Communication Theory. Psychological Record. 19 Gambier: Kenyon College.
Stephenson, W. (1968). Perspectives in psychology: XXVI consciousness out - subjectivity. Psychological Record. 18. Granville: Denison University.
101 Stephenson, W. (1988). Intentionality: Or how to buy~ loaf of bread. A paper presented at the 4th Institute on Q: University of Missouri.
Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Stephenson, W. (1961). The scientific creed - 1961: The centrality of self. Psychological Record. XI. Granville: Denison University.
Stephenson, W. (1983). Quantum theory and Q Methodology: Fictionalistic and probabilistic theories conjoined. Psychological Record. 33. 213-230 Gambier: Kenyon College.
Stephenson, W. (1967). The~ theory of mass communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tan, A. S. (1985). Mass communication theories and research. New York: Wiley.
Tate, M. W. (1970) Statistics in education and pyschology London: Macmillan
Thayer, L. (1967) Communication: Concepts and perspectives. Washington: Spartan.
Weaver, D., & Elliott, S. N. (1985) Who sets the agenda for the media? Journalism Quarterly. 62 87-94.
Wi11111er, R. D., & Dimmock, J. R. (1983) Mass media research. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.
102